Upload
others
View
5
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
~ r1ltgtIl~eS for
lt [laliey dch area
ccHcr on the imlll may
BY
SHELAGH A GALLAGHER
Chapter 1 ~-- -
Designed to Fit
Educational Implications of Gifted Adolescents Cognitive Development
LL OF A SUDDEN John eats like a horse Dwight
A brings lew friends home Tmya discovers exisshytentialism while Sarah discovers--alld then
loses-her temper Velcome to adolescence Although the external transformations capture
our attention the genesis ofadolcscenr change is internal an influx of hormones stimulates physical growth moods shift
as the hody adjusts and even the hrain is expanding opening the door to whole new vistas understanding The changes of adolescence are so numerous and tll-reaching it is a wonshyder we rry to teach these stlldems at all yet manv secondary educators feci a sense of urgency about their instruction The need to prepare students for college contributes to the urgency as does rhe need ro prepare them for work in the Int()[l11ation
The seme of ufgency also is ted by the knowledge that in some Va the clock is running out on compulsory education tOf these adolescents and before that happens they mllSt acquire enough dedication to seek the education they need independent of Lms or parents Ideally they vill have some vision of thcir future to guide their way
All thi urgencv sometimes convinces teachers that there
is roo much l LIke to take time to differentiate fOf their gifted lt[udem Yct adolescence isalso the time when it is nost likelv tim gifted ~--illb~don theirgi~l~~Z~-se of a dei rL [(l he popular of bored~l~- ~~ith ~imple schopli l1g
3
p
4 GALLAGHER
or ofd~ltenc~~~Jl~nt ~[hrhe lack of~igrificance their curriculum How do we sustain gifted students desire to learn while still preparing thcm for college and
life At the very lease hoI can we keep them from skipping class The answers
to these questions lie in the qualitative differences gifted srudents bring into the
classroom New research on the brain may well provide us with nelV ways to map
and describe these differences (see Figure 1j Even no elidence of qualitative
differences from both psvciloiogy and education provide a strong rationale for
modifying conrenr ell1phlizing thinking strategies and using student perspecshy
~reatea n~~llil~~j~tt~rc~~~at~I~-goals that are respelrru[ consisrent with seco-zruv instruction
A Rationale for Multidimensional Content Differentiation
Copious Challenging Content
Cifted students spongc-like absorprion of new information is a defining trait
Cognitive scientists have isolated at least three skills related to IQ that comhine
to create an advantage in acquiring int()fJnatiol1 According to Steiner and Carr
(2()Ol) in LlI1rs who (1) react to new information quickly (2) accomrnodare new information or habituate quickly and OJ habituated inflHmation to seek
out new stimuli quickk grow into children with high IQs Ihese same fKtors-~
rapid inforlllati()n12roc(ss~lg habit~tio~~~f1~J)rCerenCe fO[rtweltv-also are crucial to expcrt perl~)rn1ancc
Betwecl]ligh=TcTZhildren and tTle expert adults arc gifted adolescents who also
(1) learn better when taught two to three times t~l~tcr than average (rapid response to srimuli) ren]SIl1hq FHncr- repetitions (Larson amp Richards 1991)
which suggcsts h~~bitl1atioll andr~r~_)1d better to opell-ended inquiry-orishy
emeJ instrucriol1 (noveir- seeking Sak 2004) preferring to learn somcthlllg~~~w evel1 Illorc than typical Iv popular hands-on activities ilthough il is impossible to
make GlllSal or developmcntal ties based on these separate bodies of research the
similarities arc clear
As gifted adolescents cng~lge in the cycle of seeking responding to and
accommodating new informarion they acql1irc an extensive knowledge base
which contributes to acadcmic SLiccess Helping gifted students acquire a subshystambl knowledge base is th( hr( csential component of an dfectile secondary
program
Should differenrinioll then foclls on intensive memorization tacts No
Gifted srudems consbremil report thlt the dominant cmphasi on LlCrual learnshy
ing leads to thcir disenchantment IIith school (Csikszenrmihahi Rarhunde amp Whalen 1993 Gallagher --larradine amp Coleman 199- Kmelskv amp Keighley
2003 Plucker amp 1clntir 1 )96) lhe extensive knmdeug hasc giftcd students
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
5 DESIGNED TO FIT
Adults often wonder what happened to the mind of a new adolescent as it often seems to have disappeared Ironically adolescents dont suffer from a lack of grey matter rather they have a surfeit A decade of research using Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) technology has revealed that brain development is much more dynamic than once thought particularly during adolescence Key findings include
1 Just before the teenage years the brain acquires a mass of new grey matshyter Grabner Neubauer and Stern (2006) reported this new brain growth peaks at around 11 for girls and 12 for boys
2 The new grey matter is deposited in the prefrontal cortex which controls executive functions impulse control deciSion-making reasoning and planning
3 Myelinization of an early adolescents prefrontal cortex is significantly less developed than an adults Myelin the insulation helps make strong efficient connections between neurons the neural connections manifest as thought or action Myelin develops as a result of exercising an area of the brain much as muscle develops as a result of exercising an arm or leg New and unexercised an adolescents new prefrontal cortex--the area that controls executive function-is relatively flabby and in need of a workout (Sowell et aI 2003)
4 Unable to efficiently use their flabby prefrontal cortex young teens rely on other regions of the brain including the amygdala which sends out impulsive gut reactions to respond to certain stimuli like facial expressions Adults use their prefrontal cortex to respond to the same stimuli Only in later adolescence does the teen brain begin to respond like an adults (Yurgelun-Todd amp Kilgore 2006)
5 Individuals with high measured IQ also tend to have more grey matter in the prefrontal cortex than individuals whose IQ is average or below (Haier Jung Yeo Head amp Alkire 2004) suggesting the opportunity to develop more or stronger executive control function
6 The preadolescent influx of grey matter is followed by attrition throughshyout adolescence Grabner and colleagues (2006) called this a pruning process that weeds out weak neural connections and retains stronger connections
For decades the assumption has been that secondary educators have been adding to a work in progress helping to mold a brain that has been around since a childs birth Current research replaces this picture with another 12-year-olds hurrying down crowded hallways each carrying a mass of untrained brain This image might serve as a call to action for any teacher but it is particularly important for gifted educators because the prefrontal cortex regions are critical for essentially all higher order cognitive functions (Grabner et aI 2006 p 436) Grabner et al noted the observed efficiency of prefrontal cortex activity in intelligent individuals suggests that they are malleable and responsive to training
The key to changing an unpredictable impulsive 1 2-year-old into a more self-possessed 22-year-old lies at least in part on the effective development of executive control processes Given the relationship between prefrontal matter and intelligence gifted students may well have more potential for executive control skill to develop-or waste Because the adolescent brain also will engage in winnowshying out unused or ineffective neural connections it seems incumbent upon gifted educators to pay special attention to this area during the secondary years
FIGURE 1 Neurological changes at adolescence
A Guide to Recommended Practices
6 GALLACHeR
develop is significant because more leads to different (Berliner 1986 as cited
in Shiever amp Maker 199~) Vith more content at their disposal gifted students
can make more connections and see more original relationships fen a strong
knowledge base facilitates and is facilitated by the development of advanced
domain-specific strategies and metacognitive knovvlcdge (Carr amp Alexander 1996 p 214) Over time these strategies accumulate and create an im perus toward
complex and abstract leH1s of understanding
Abstract Complex Content
Another form of diHerentiation panicularlv appropriate f(Jr gifted students
is exposure to abstracr cOIlClprual ideas Abstract reasoning creates its OWIl rc)rm of new content ro understand encompassing inrll1gible notions such as hypothshy
esis posing theorizing and analogous reasoning Bv implication srudents must
hlYe acces to abstract reasoning before they can succeed with curriculum that
rlquires designing experiments inrerpreting symbolic meaning or comparing
polic~ initiatives
Students are generally thought to have ~lCces to abstract thought with the onset
of adolescence and the acquisition of fiJrmal operational reasoning (Inhdder amp Piaget 1958) Svsttmatic differences between groups in the acquisition of formal
operational reasoning would provide compelling reawns (0 diff(rentiate in order to
capitalize on the early opportullity to begin honing these essential skill Berninger
and YHes (1995) present a thorough review of the literature on gifted students and
[(Hillal operations demollstrating that
1 Children move through the Pbgetian stages in the SHlll order but not on
the same timcline Cifted students acquire lHll1al operational reasoning
around ages 12-- 11 1110t other students arc still in the transition to f(Hl11al
operations It age 1 i 2 Cifted boys tend to enttr formal operations earlier than gifted girls ~nle
etfect size of this ditt(ren(e is smail and the male advantage dil11inishts
by bte adolescence
3 Cifted adolescents progress through substages of formal operations more
quickly than their age-mates
Cifted students have the Cclpacin f()r abstracr conceptual reasoning as many
as ) years ahead of their peers-thc equillIlent their emire illedle school (areers
Naturallr variability exists in both the gifted and average populations but still the
implications arc clear (itrcd srudents are readv to grapple with qualitatively dif
fercn t con ten t years ahead of thci l cLlssnu tes ()nce formal oper~ltions arc achieved
instruction should be dl~igncd ((lard mastering this new [(lrm of content as it
is critical for Sllccess in econdar ltCademics (Bitner Il)) I Cipson Abraham amp
Renner 1989 Hurst amp MilkCnt 19 ~latthevs amp McLaughlin 1994 McDonald
1 ()89 iaz amp Robinson 19()2 Xnwing 1989) Incorporating conceptual content
with a plentiful ElCtual base also prmides a means ofensuring that learning will not
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
7
r
i shy
[
J
[
DESIGNED TO FIT
fall into drill and rote memorization Concepts help organize facts resulting in more meaningful connections and expert-like thinking (Shore amp Irving 2005)
Disciplinary or Interdisciplinary Content
Understanding the need for a deep concept-centered knowledge base is only pardy useful it also is necessar~ to know how to focus the knowledge Compelling
arguments can be made in two directions On one hand opportunity for early
specialization is essential tor students with exemplary talent (jarvin amp Subotnik
2006) Early specialization also makes sense for many students whose chosen career
may require many years ofschooling On the other hand the modern age is marked by unique combinations of traditional disciplines into new fields (Klein 19(3) and innovation is often the resulr of cross-disciplinary application similar to the use of linguistics to decode the DNA sequence (Young 20tH) Ultimately tilL
most effective programs for gifted adolescents provide the choice ro eithergt) wide
or deep whil~ ensuring some exposure ro deep disciplinary thinking and original
interdisciplinary connections regardless of the direction students take In sum gifted students arc capable of learning substantially more content
than their peers They also have earlv capacity for abstract thought which both
adds a of contenr and helps organize bcmal inr(lrmation Building a gifted students knowledge baslt maklts sense especially because this knowledge base is a
predictor of academic sliccess Ensuring that gifted students fond as they are of novel tv remain engaged in learning requires the presentation of content that
bull presents information using instructional models that Elcilitate idenrificashy
tion and creation of meaningful connections
bull allmvs for inductive and deductivlt connections between facts and absrract ideas
bull incorporates time specifically f()1 cultivation of abstract reasoning and bull encourages either deep exploration of one diScipline (with exposure to
inrerdisciplinary thought) or wide exploration of several disciplines (with
exposure to deep exploration in one field)~or both
Frequent Opportunities for Higher Order Thinking
Ihe knowledge base gifted students acquire may he impressie but it is ultishy
mnely fairly useless unless rhev pur that knowledge ro work with the help thinking strategies SurprisinglY (he research base on gifted adolecents unique
chinking arrribnrcs is thin in both gifted education and cognitive science research
on how cognitive difhrenccs dCIclop is virtuallv nonexistent (Steiner amp Carr 2003)
The research that is available tltnds to tocus on three interrelated areas ( JI strategic thinking metacognitioI1 and (5) cxpen thinking
Thinking to Slow Down Gifted students generallv use the same set of srratltgies that other students use so in terms of sheer number of
A Guide to Recommended Practices
8 CALLAGHER
strategies employed they do not seem difFerent from other students (Hong 1999)
However gifted students learn more quickly and when r~lCcd with a challenging
task they use more complex ftlfmS of strategies and often seleer sophisticated
strategies lSteiner amp Carr 2006) Having more contenr at their disposal they have
the capacity to use thinking strategies to more original ends As obvious as it may
seem however it bears emphasizing that there is a difFerence berween knowing a
strategy and using a strategy Evidence suggests that gifted studenrs only use their
critical thinking srrategies when they perceive a need that is when the challenge
of a task merits their use (Hong 199))
Gifted students advantage with thinking strategies is especiallv apparent when
they are engaged in prohlem solving Cdred srudenrs tend to show a greater explicit
knowledge of problcm-sohing stages know more problem-solving strategies and
are more adepr in selecting strategies to usc when t~1Ced h an open-ended problem
111ey also are more inclined to switch from one strategy to another when necesshy
sary (Kanevskv 1 ()92) [he sucngrh gitred studenrs demonstrate is evident even
in the absence of direct instruction in problem solving gifted stLIdenrs seem to
invent strltegies when needed (lonrague 1991) Xhile they 1re problem solving
t1st-learning gifted studenrs slow down taking more time to plan and strategize
(Davidson amp Sternberg 1 ()84 Shore amp Lazar 1996) [n addition they show early
tendencies toward expert-like behavior when prohlem solving content knowledge
may strengthen this tendencv (Cherne Jinter amp Cherney 20()))
In sunllnary gitred smdcl1[s dCl11onsrrlfe superior performance in a wide range
of thinking skills which they use well and selectivelv However gifted stlldellts
use these skills onh when faced with meaningful challenges Ensuring that gifted
srudenrs develop their skills in critical thinking requires
bull consranr exposure to challenging conrent
bull tasks more challenging than aYcrage requiring the use of critical
thinking
bull reflective time to engage III problem finding planning and cOllcepmai
reasoning and
bull an oer111 p1(e curriculum 1Ild instruction in which time saved a a result
of ra~lid COlHenr learning is spellt on more difficult complex thinking
Afelflcog1lii(JIl In the cark 1))-10 Sternberg (I (JH2 propoed that l11ctacognishy
tion the ability to Oversee and manage thinking is an important flCwr in gifted
pertl)rmlt1nceAfter two decades of research a more specitlc hut unexpected picshy
mre has emerged ofgittcd studel[~ llse of l11ctacognitiol1 AltilOugh it is dear that
mcr1cognirion is a component or cXLmpL1r pertl)rmaI1Ce gifted students do nO[
show a clcar-cut pcrtlJrmance adYll1tagl In tlcr there lfC on two areas of metashy
cognition where gitred studclHS COlbistlIlrV show superior performance (1) gifted
student knowledge 1hollt speLdic iemling strategics and i) their indination to
usc a skill in a ncw usual gteIting Iso known IS far rrlmt~I (Carr amp Alexanmiddot
der 1996 Robinson 0 ClinhmiddotnbLlld 19()x Span amp Cherroom-Corsmit 1986)
Other s[udie of l11l[~K()gl1itiun hem onk a slight adYltllHlge gitred studenrs
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
son
iu
pn till
(tr
11 [
the
S( 1
th
d~ tic
() le1
tiH
flU
dmiddot l
Lu
Inl I
1lt1 li
j ri
bull
pot
hlll I
SlrLI
Pl Sh )
DtSIGNED TO FIT 9
~-~I~Jl~
-itd
~~l
lLmiddot [
- 1HJ
tlcd
ci[lmiddotd
ci picshy
cr tilar
I()11 to
~ cxanshy l)-())
lt lLLms
some show inferior performance among gifted youth (Dresel amp Haugwitz 2005
Ludlow amp Woodrum 1982) At first glance these findings seem counrerintuitive Why wouldnt gifted stushy
dents show the same advantage in metacognition that they have in learning content
and using thinking skills Carr and Alexander (1996) presenred three plausible
explanations First the tasks llsed in metacognitive research especially research on
near transfer may be so easy that gifted srudenrs do well without monitoring their
performance 111is would explain vhy gifted students are similar to their peers in
their use of metacognitive skills on near transfer tasks but consistently perform betshy
ter on far transfer tasks Far transfer tasks offer a greater challenge requiring gifted
smdems to engage in sdf-monitoring Drescl and Haugwitz (200)) conducted a
classroom-based study that reintorces this notion finding that gifted students did
nO[ use self-regulating behavior if thev thought an assignment was easy Based on
their study they concluded the finding that students with high abilities use
strategies less frequentlv in regular school lessons can be seen as an indication that
their learning environment is inadequately low (p I )) In order ro provide
gifced students with the same amount of practice in self-regulation as average stushy
dems they must work as frequently with tasks the find challenging-I11e alternashy
tive is to leave these skills undeveloped underdeveloped or poorly ckvcloped
Second the relationship between metacognition and IQ lllay have a threshshy
old dlCct lQ may predict skilled LIse of metacognition up to a point Once the
threshold is crossed I(~ docs not guarantee that children will acquire or usc
cognitive skills such as Illcracognitioll believed to promote high achievement
1l1ese cognitie kills appear to deeop instead our ofel11crging expertise (Carr
amp Alexander 19W) p 214) 111 iId the generic conrent-free nature of research tasks may be both u nrcal istic
and unlikelv to [eltal gifted performance difFerences Research Oil expert perforshy
mance suggests that cognitivc monitoring realh is on necessary after thc student
develops I deep and signif1cam body of discipline-based coment (Chi Glaser amp Em 19RR Rabinowitz amp Glaser 19Wi)
In SLIm gifted students have accts) to seWregulatory lwhaviors but lise them
inconsistenrh- Llltctive self-regulation is relatcd both to ltlcademic success and to
adlllt expert percml) 111 cO Ensuring that gifted students have adequate practice
wirh a wide range of metltlcognitivc skills requires
bull constanr exposure ro chaltnging Cllmcnr
bull learn j ng tasks slIfficicn tk d iftlcul r to requi re sOl f-regulation 1l1el bull immersion in disciplinan-hased CO I1(C 11(
EjJfrtis( and 1migh r i nw expert performance prmides ] guideshy
post trll planning programs ttlr gifred adolescenrs because we aspire for Ihll11 ro become experts or innomiddotlt1wrs in their chosen field Research filldings conrinul ro
strengthen the rit between gifrlmiddotd srudenrs thought processes and rhar of domainshy
specitlc expertS (Gorodetsb 0 -hlir 2003 Klll till an Genrile amp Bacr 200) Shore 2(00) Common charlc-rnirics ~llreadv discllssed include rapid acquisirion
A Guide to Recommended Practices
GALLAGHER10
of content skill and flexibility in critical thinking and self-regulation Gifted srudenrs seem to intuitively have some expert-like skills (Kaufman er ai 2005) while others are only acquired through training (Cherney et ai 2005)
Reviewing the literature on expertise Carr and Alexander (1996) pointed our
that it more than skill and ability to be an expert Although experts need sufficient general ability (IQ) to perf()fm at a high level other such as task
commitmenr a sttOng knowledge and social suppOrt are more important tor developing expertise and promoting achievement through expertise (p 214) Ihe list of teguiremenrs for expertise also includes perspective forward problem solving persistence risk taking and tacit knowledge professional language and behaviors Jarvin amp Sllbornik 2006 Shore 2000 Sternberg 2(03) Expershy
tise in this larger sense can be devcoped using curriculum and instruction
emphasize problem solving open-ended questions construction ofideas multiple
perspectives and exposure to disciplinary experts (Gallagher 2006 Shore amp Irving
2005 Sternberg 2003 Sllbornik 2003) [11 sum gifted students cognitivl characteristics parallel those of adult lxperts
Ensuring thar gifted srudlnts continue to develop lxperr-like skills requires
bull exposure to explicit and tacit dbciplinary knowledge bull time to engage in flexibll thinking with disciplinary and interdisciplinary
content
bull curriculum and instruction thar incorporate inquiry cOl1ceptuallearning and authentic conrexts and
bull opportunities f(lI problem solving and mentorships
The Role of Student Perspective Epistemology
Still missing is perhaps t11l most importanr rlCror abollt the education ofgifred adole~cellts Etons to design effective programs and promote new kinds of practice will be for naught if thc srudems themselves do not recognize the significance or
valuc in (he tasks assigned [ he t(JrI11 of perspecrivl in question is tpistemgy ones abo lit rhe nature
of knowledge Perry (1 presel1[ed a developmental scheme that made direct
and pragmatic application [0 the classroom tor it described both how students
views of knowledge change Ocr time and also the powerful eteCt ditering views
have in the classroom Perrys scheme presents nine distincr positions that can be collapsed into four broad suges as sUlllmarized by Gallagher (2006)
Dualism Marked by a black-and-white perspective srudents at rhis sragl
believe aillegirimate questions have certain anSWlrs So-called questions without answers are jmt nOl1seme questions pointless
Multiplicity Stlldents acknowledge that there arc a kw unanswered
questions hut hdiCL dur in the absence of an ltlnswer all opinions on the matter are egualk alid
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Student
III
kl(
[h
hu [he ~J
() r
lV ~ rk Illmiddot
I I ~
id
11
kJ
11 DESIGNED TO FIT
middot dti t
1 __1
tl
n~
u~url
- l i rlcl
cLnt~
~ leWS
-1-1 be
lll1
Contextual Relativism Unanswered questions are investigated using the
tools provided by each discipline each discipline approaches questions in a different wav Certain amwers are unlikely bur a best ansver can
be achieved using the proper rools
CommitmentDialectic Theories are used [() set directions for imporshy
cam questions most of which have no right or wrong answers Gaining understanding requires building upon the possibilities presented by dara as interpreted by a consciously selected point ofview bur with willingness
to change perspective if rhe need arises (p 436)
l~lble 1 presents the f(lUr stages aligned with the beliefs about learning that Iecomshy
pany each stage For a more concrete example comider Carl and Cedric two students waitshy
ing for class to begin Carl believes rlwt knowledge means fH-rS and being knowledgeable means remembering lots of bets Cedric 011 the other band
thinks that knowledge is the abilitv to combine bcts to create ideas For Cedric
being knowledgeable isnt aboll[ the numher of ElCts he knows its ahout how the [Kts can form and rd()fIll to create diffltrent ideas Their teacher Ms Morshy
gan starts her lecture on the Trail oflCars f()(using on the sequence of even ts
detailing what who and when Carl picks up his pen and starts studiously takshying notes Cedric slumps down in his desk grumbling [lCtoids-lbe two boys
hear the same lccrure bom the same teacher but their ditterent belids abour
knowledge afftC[ bow willing they are to accept the inf()rmation as meaningful or valid
A numher ofrheories nmv artempt to describe aspects ofepistel11ological develshyopment (Baxter 1agolda 1987 King amp Kitchener 1994 Schommer 1994) Each theory describes sequen tiaL developmentalmovemenr from a low or naive stance in which knowledge is equated with flctllal inr()Jmation and memorization to
a high or mature stance in which bets are used ro build theories from a
consciollsly selected point ofview but with willingness w change perspective if the need arises (C~lllagher 2006 p 43(1) In the example above Carl holds a navc
stallce and thu~ is happy to gather up a list of taCtS from the lecture Cedrics stance
is more mature and he wishes the flcts had been embedded in more meaningful ideas
Je ComprelJemizie Irnptlct (1Fpitemgy At one level the impact of Carls
and Cedrics differing heliefs is immediately apparent Students are not like ro learn what the do 110 helilVl to be Illeaningfu-or at least they wont learn it
t()r long After two decades of reselrch into the effeC( of epistemology on karning
it is clear that the impact extends hevond whether students like whl( thl learn to
a number of other important ilCldll1lic Ol[COll1es dCllciemil ilcJitlJcmcnt Using a structural equation
analysis Cano (2005) f()ulld that high school students epistemological stance had
both direct and indirect effects 011 academic achievement Similar results have been
A Guide to Recommended Practices
Stages of Epistemological
Development(3
co Beliefs 3 Associated With the Positionl shyVgt rI)
1 rI) ~
~ -shy
Instruction That C
Matches~
shyshy Epistemological Vgt ngt Stage 0 l- -lt Instruction That Vgt Encourages c shy Movement to a ~ Higher Stage
Earlier Positions
r 0 ~ ~
T 4~ r r r ~
TABLI 1
Perrys StagesPositions of Epistemological Reasoning and Related Instructional Strategies
-
Dualism Multiplicity Relativism
Knowledge is cer- Some questions have I Knowledge is interpreted tam (right or wrong) no certain answers in and unambiquous these cases knowledge
I in context distinguishing better from worse answers
and truth are subjec- Irequires selecting theories Authorities (teachers) live so everyones opinshy Ih b jt he quPtiouknow The Truth ion is eq~llyvalid
Activities that help Practice in comparshy Practice in creating students develop skill ing hypotheses and
comparing and select-
in memorization and theories acknowledgshy ing preferable theoshyrecall mnemonics etc ing all possibilities retical models
in exoert behaviors
Exposure to lems with more than in different disciplines one right answer andl to conduct research or more than one construct theories approach to a solution and make decisions
RanCJe of Typical School Senior
Range of Gifted High School Senior
~ ~ I g C shy ~ n ~ -5 ~ ~ ~ ~ shy
~- ~ ~r r rshy - shyr r l
~ r- r
2-~ r- shy shy
~
r r
I CommitmentDialectic
Knowledge methods are and uncertain Choices require analysis and values
Later Positions
n Z 0 l ln 0r
~ shy~
N
( raquo shyraquo CI J
0
13 DESIGNED TO FIT
found with middle school srudenrs (Schommer-Aikins Duell amp 11l[ter 2005) Studenrs at lower levels may have trouble correcring misconceptions and draw
only fact-based information from inquiry-oriented environments (Ryan ] 984) Epistemological Jtanee aJectJ ildvanced academic performance Students with
more advanced belief have an easier time building logical arguments (Weinstock
Kellman amp Tabak 2(04) they tend to choose thinking strategies that Slipport
deep rather than surface learning (Cano 2005 Zhang amp Watkins 2(01) Kitchshy
enet (1983) also suggested that students selectioll of meracognirive strategies can
be affected by their epis((mologicai beliefs Support for this idea comes from a study by Ruban and Reis (2006) who found that high-achieving students tended
to select cnhancemem oriented learning strategies while lower achieving srudents
selected survival oriented strategies
Illstruction can encourage )WIemem to higber epistemological elcTelChers
can affecr changes in students epistemological thinking through intentionally
structllred learning experiences (Kloss 1094 Kronholm 1993l Strategies recomshy
mended to dCc1op epistemological thinking include using ill-structured problems
and instructional straregics thar allow srudenrs to examine their assumptions anashy
lyze data that present different conHicting perspectiyes and then make decisions
(King amp Kitchener 20(4) Devoting some time to direct instruction about tbe
narure of the discipline helps develop higher levels of reasoning (Bdl 20(4) vhmltltch bet1 iecn instructiol t7 lid epistemoogiCtl Itllnee (pnspect i IJt) colltributes
to jruurrltiol[ (wd disillusiolllJlflll Cedric didnt respond well when Ms Marrin
started a f1Cr-based lecture Over time he will simply decide that school is trivial
or worse meaningless Had Ms 1artin staned imtead with a discllssion of the
violation of Native Americans sense of personhood Cedric wOllld have been
thrilled and Carl would hae been lost This kind of disparity creates barriers to
learning (Nelson 19()6 PelTY 1(70) --Jebel and Schommer-Aikins (2002) f()lnd
that a mismatch between insrruction and stance caused work avoidance among
some high school phYsics students Lovell and lunnefY (2004) ltJUnd that srudents
even found small-group work Illore Itisfing when they Vere grouped according
to sranct (perspecrhc)
Giftrd tlldCIIpound1 tmel to tlJead iii epistemgical dezclopllllllt Stll(iiLs of adoshylescents doculllent that cpistemological belicts mature in a pndioablc dcvelopshy
mental sequcnce (Cano 200) Zhang amp latk ins 2(01) In parallcl to formal
operational reasoning gifred rdoiesccl1t move through episremologicli stges in
the same sequence (Ihomas 2()08) but tend to be a stage or rwo ahead of orlIer
rhe same age (Arlin amp LCirr Il))X Goldberger 1981 Schollll11er I Dunnell
1997 ~n1Omas) 2008 Wilkinsoll I Iaxwcll 1991 iilkinsoll amp Schw~lrtz 19X-1
Lible 1 provides a general seme of the distribution of senior year studcm baSell on existing research
Adult experts tend to holt IlrlzlIIeal epi)tllIIologimlliClls -Ihc epistcl11ojogicri
framework also provides a UHl1lCtiOIl to anuther aspect of experrisc -CIO the
disciplines the behaviors and l([irlllk associared with mature episrel11ologv arc
A Guide to Recommended Practices
[
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
gt ~ ~--------------
GALLAGHER14
considered essential for advanced authentic work (Buehl amp Alexander 2005 Felder 1997 Henderson 1995 Kloss 1994 Muis 20(4)
Connections With G~fted Education Evidence that gifted students tend ro
be somewhat ahead of their age-mates in epistemological development follows
naturally from the data on formal operations reponed above However other
inreresting connections bring this theon into cohesion with existing knowledge
of giftltd students for example there is some indication that people who prlttCr
Intuition on the Jhers-Briggs Type Inventory tend [() have higher epistemologishy
cal stances (Zhang 199()) Cifted rudents overwhelmingly report this prdlrenCl
(Sak 2004) and the connecrion gives further evidencc that giftcd students will
respond best to open-ended inquiry-oriented learning environments Similarly
it explains gifted adolescents positive response to mentOr relationships Like
all adolescents gifted reenagers want to see similarities bcrween themselves and
others in mentors they find kindred spirits who think abour ideas from similar
frames of mind
Most exciting perhaps is the COil necrion between epistell1oosY md expertise
Not only do gifted students show earlv potential to achieve the expens high levels
of reasoning bur also epistell1ologicalll10deis provide a guide to he p explain how [() move all students closer to authentic higher order reasoning Callagher (l99X) suggested that models slIch as these would make effecdve frameworks for designing
high school curriculum providing an organic model for differentiation Based on
his study of adolescent epistelllological beliefs Cano (200raquo) concurred
it is necessary to take into account nor only students previous knowlshy
edge and learning strategies bur also their learning approaches and
epistemological beliefs Secondlv wc should work directly to try to
enhance [he depth of learning approaches and the complexity of episshy
temological belid~ as way of improving academic achievemenc (p 217)
Finally this framework reinforces the notion that the outcomes tt)r ignorshy
ing srudents beliefs are grave Srudents have trouble accepting the relevance of
instrtlLtion that is out of sync with their stag (Perr- ]970) a finding that is
consonant with the well-established knowledge that gifred adolescents reject munshy
dane repetitive curriculum hlrrher gifted students operating at higher levels than
other students find instrllction orienred towards the majorit uninspiring and
communicate their feelings through underachievement More sltriollsly perhaps
Nelson (1989) cautioned that excessive time spent in low-lenl curriculum actively
builds a wall of habit that blocks the path to higher level reasoning Even rapid
acceleration can havc this d~magillg eftect ifstudenrs are onlv accelerated into nev
low-level content It) prmidl a climl[e read for higher order thinking educators
must present COIltCIH that is accelerated vertically as well as horizomalh-
CI [
tCl ~I
1
lhe IS 110 i I
and fUc
hest n~II
15
bull - r
~ shy
~
~n( )1shy
()f ut I
l1UI1shy
[hm
inti
lpid
DLltiCNEl) TO m
Complete Coherence Evidence-Based Recommendations for
Differentiation in Secondary School
Each of the perspecrivcs considercc1 in this rationale is championed h differshy
ent researchers operating from different paradigms and using differenr research
techniques Even so their respectin findings arc remarkably similar
1 Gifted adolescents nced exposure [0 ~l larger quanrity of coment that
the find dnllenging Beginning at least in middle schooL abstract conshy
tenr should he a srandard part of their curriculum I he importlnle of developing a plenriful high-quality wcll of information i essLlHial as
it is a precursor to using higher order thinking ll1etJcognitivc thinking
and abstract thinking Cifted students will lot adequJtek develop their
thinking skills without this knowledge base 2 A quality knowledge bZlse is neCssary hilt notutticilmiddotllt ItH developing
thinking skilk Ciftecl studenrs 1lUt be presented with Ierning experishy
ences that require them to engage their critical thinking skills and metlshy
cognitive skills If they do not find their assignments challenging their
brains willilot engage their higher order functions T()gether content and
strategv med along ith metacognition predict academic perf()[mltlnce
making the simultalleous devdopmenr of these three paramount
3 Cifted students show earl~ promise t()r deydoping expertise Capitalizi ng
on that earlv promise requires instruction where stlldems Gl1 practice the
qualities of expcrtbe including open-ended imtruction inquiry-based
instruction problcm-oriented instrucrion field experiences and menrorshy
ships all cCl1[ercd 011 high-qualitv disciplinarv or imcrdisciplinary content
Cifted srudents arc most lihk to sec this instruction as relevant and draw
maximum value hom it
4 Expertisc requircs more thall contLflt and skill habits of mind ~llld
~llhaI1C1d epistemological re~lsoning also arc essentiaL If we aspirc for gifted students-~or for allY s(Udel1l~--to hecome creative productive leadshy
ers in their chosen field curriculutH ~lJld instruction should he selected to
develop these simultaneoush- and include exposure to the philosophies
and (thics of thc disciplines
The absence of a qualin- differerlliated secondary progrll11 flH gifted students
is not a neutral position it is 1 choice that will result in deficit skill dCeopmcnt
and student apathy At worr it ill result in the disillusionment some of the
best minds in the country
A Guide to Recommended Practices
i
GALLAGHER16
References
Arlin P K amp Levin L (1998) A deelopmenta perspc((ic on giftedness
HeetlrcIoltnlld I )4~~5i(1 Baxter Jvlagolda Jvl B (J 987) Comparing open-ended inteljcs lnd standardized mea- Hair
sun of inrelieefUal development ollilla Strfmt PCIJoiJle 28 443~44S -i
BdL E (2004) Promoring StUdUHS argumenr consrrncriOll and collahorativc debate in thc Hell science classfl)om rn ~ 1 C Linn E A Davis amp P Bell (Eds J Imimlt J1lrOltrrIOtS h~middot
seimC IIiCilioll (pp 11 i-145) lal11ah 1 Lawrence Erlballl11
rkrningcr V amp Yates C (J (95) Formal operational thought in rhe gifted A postshy H(ln~
Piagetian pnspecriC Hu(ti (nilli I) 220~224 HUN
Rirnn B L (l991 Formal operHional nlsolling Illodes Predictors of critical thinking
abilit ies alld grade assigned Iw reacher in sciencc and nlarhemltltics il[ student in
grades nine rhrough [tke Ollljli ill Sciei( 28 2()-2~4 InhclcL
Buehl 1 amp Alnlnder P (2001) lorivarion and pnr~HlllaJl(e ditferemes in srudelJ[
dOllllin-specific epiSrllllUI()~illt11 bel iet profiles ilIHlIll FdllClitiolfll NCilllrchOII1i
middoti2 (N-- - 2(
ClIlO I (200i) Lpistcl]ologicai bclid~ IJlld a[lproaches to Icllning Ih~ir through lh secol1dan chool wd their influcncc Oil lCademic pn~lrn1alKe Bllti_f lotmil
tdlildtiOllit -) 205- 221 Kanl
ClIl 1 amp Alexander I (I )()6) Xhere giftd children do 1Ild do nO[ cxcel on llleracogshy
n irin lasb Noel) NcriCiI 18 12lt 1( 1)
Cherne L 11 VinrCl J amp Chlrnc j1 l (200i) NucleH problem s()h-ln~ Kanl
elise stUlh of expert-I1Oicl differences hllliSlletoll fI(the iVdmtI of
Seillle w 1-- hi 11 T H (lascL R amp iarr 1 J (itk) (19HHl Ihc Itttn If
NJ Lawrence Erlbaulll King I
CsiksCIHIll ihali 1 1 Ib rJundt K amp Whakn S ( 1 )94) ]tIIIItc tieillgcn 11( mou of I 1 JifCCC-S Iiiirifllllln Bmrou ( PrlmiddotSS ~
[lidson I L amp I I tJ)Hj)lh roll ofimighr in ilwlIeuual ~ifredncs King l
(dial Child (jlltrtal ]8 is-hi dc Urnl 1 amp lLlll~jl 1 11()()iIlhlmiddot riariollshil hcmlln 1biliriLs and slt1rshy
regllbrld Ic~lrning l ilkncc ti) imcraLTiolb with leIck-mil sdt~lomcpt Ild gender
iglllbiit) lirlI ( 2() 1 ) S
Felder R (19~J 1 kCl our s1Udenrs Dac hrrlLl and Ruhcllo ChtlJiicd KItin
Fdll(iltOi31 10(- j() d Cllb~hcr J l-Llrrallilll C ( 0 (olcn1lt1ll ~1 R (J 9F) UlilIkllgc or boredom Ciftld Ii
tlldIHS ics on rhir ((Pi1 NUiCli 19 132~l(1 iI
Callagher S A (l)lt)H 11 he ((lld 10 ulrinl rhinking I he scheille lilt llleH1in~ht KIo I
ditttTcnriation ii Hill(IiII 8li iL)) 12-20 ic Calb~her S 1 (2()()()1 l rhmiddot to slience expcrtiscmiddot In F Dixon amp S Kronl](I
0100[1 ( l IitI)i u (lllllIO1 [PI 1()~middot+6(J) I1U) TX (n
Irufroc k Prns larson 1
CipsoJ] 1 brdulll 1 0 Ic1111ll L t 19S)1 Rcll(ollhil hC[Cll1 t(lrmal-opltTniullll dlOughr and ttllhclrud ditkulrie in geflLtiS problem IUIilidl ofRlsldJ(f ill --I J gt~
Slilll( ( S 1 1--S2 I Loell (
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
17 DESIGNED TO fiT
ul
IX
Gorodetsky 1 amp Klavir R (2003) What can we learn from how giftedaverage pupils
describe their processes of problem solving) Learning amp Instruction 13 305-326 Grabner R Neubauer A amp Srern E (2006) Superior performance and neural efficiencv
Ihe impact of intelligence and expertise Brain Research Bulletin 69 422-439 Haicr R J JUl1g R E Yeo R A Head K amp Alkire M r (200t) Srrllcrural brain
variHion and general inrelligence Netlroimage J L 425-435 Henderson S (J 995) Vh do I hae ro be here) The Advanced Placement srudelH in
firs(~vear composition Problems and isslles in cognitive development journal ondar) Gifted EduCtlri(Jl 7 )24-532
Hong L (19)9) Swdying the mind of rhe gifted ROfper Relieu 21 244-2)2 Hurst R amp Milkenr 11 (1996) Facilitaring successful prediccion problem gt(living in
biology through application ofskill theor jOllnJal ill Scimce ) 541-)52
Inhclder fl amp Piager j (19)8) the cililrflIor1I IlrO-fi((
Jew York Basic fI()oks
Jarvin L amp Subomik R (2006) Understanding elitc taient ill acadcmil domaim A
dcvclopmcl1(al ttajccwn from hasic ahilities O scholarlv producrivitvcmisfr In E A Dixon amp S 1 Moon (Eek) thc hillidbook (pp205-220) vhco TX Prufrock Press
Kancsky L (1)92) Gifred children and thc learning process Imights on both tlom rhe
rcsearch III E Miinks amp Xi Peters (Eds) J(tlmr r1( (pp 1))middot161) Asscn
Ihe 0lctherlands Van CorClUll
Kanevsky L amp KeighlcvL (2003) 1~) produce or nor ro produce understanding hOi dum and the honor in umkrlchkl111cnr RCIitll26 2()2R
Kauflll]n J C Gentile C r amp Bllf J (200)) Do gifted sflllknr writers and crec)(ive
writing experts raIL lTlcni in till same Child QlltlltCrl 4) 2()O-265 King P v1 amp Kitchener K S (1)94) jll(zr1II IllI
flild illtcllltfli ill flrocsCm fllld (lIn San
Francisco Josse~ Bass
King l 1 amp Kitchencr K S (2004) Iefieltivc judgllllm Ihcorv and research on thl
dtveioplllelH ()f pircmic assllmptions through adulrhood Fdilolfiolltll
YJ(I) )-lR
Kitchener K S (1 )HI) Cogllition Il1ctalugnirioll and episttmic cognition A rhrcltlevel
model of cognitivc pnllc fl1I11II11I )11 dOjJ 1IItl1 I 6 222~252 Klein J T (I ))3) Blurring CLIcking mel crossing Permcation and thc fracturing of
discipline In E lesscr-DlidO D R ShUlllV amp D J Shan (Eds) (Pl 1 Hi-21 I) Charlnwsdle Uniersin
of Virginia Press
Kloss R J (19)4) nudge is hest Helping srudems throllgh rhe Iern schellll of intll
Iccruat Jeel0pllhnr I] I i 1-1 lH
Kronholm M 1 (19J) l Ihe i mp)ct of dCIdnpmenral instruction on rcHen ill iudgmellL
RCIieU ofHigber ErlIldtillll I i 1))-middot2)) Larson R V amp Richmk 1 11 1 L)J 1 ugusr) Boredom in (hi middle scilll() I
ears Blaming schoolgt erus gtIamitlg mdenrs 1l11encdll jOIiJIiI OjliJI(I[JOII 9)
418-44) Lmell C X amp 0unnen j i 2()()i i Tesling the adulr dCelopme1( I()CI of [lahel
hvpothesis HOI1l0gillCOll hmiddot lln position mllaboldtile learning groups and grcldu
ate student sarisfanion tllrtr 11 IY) 1)0
A Guide to Recommended Practices
L GtgtLlA(HER18
Ludlow B L amp Voodrum D T (1)82) Problem-sohing and aerag~
Icarners on a multiple discrimination task (ild
Matthews D amp lkLwghlin T 1)94) EHects otleHIlr-cclHcln acthitics on
achievement and students preterences in [So hiih 5c11Ol lLtrSes HI(tPWdl
fllld AOo)li -8 28)-286 ivlcDonJkl J (I )Kl) Cogniric dcnlopmenr Jnd the rlUdU or geometric contcllr
Rlslrd ill f(ltbcJlldti f((cilwm 20 -11-)4
vlontlgue 1 (19() 1 J Cihnl and Icnning diabkd gifrcd smdllls lise of knowledge and
usc of mrriHIllHicli and prohlem sohing srrarcgic I I(uuioll oftII
11 Y))-+II
middotluis K (2004) ierson(rl cpisrcmologv and marhcmuics - critical rcic and smhesis
of research RcIlli lifdll(lIli()Ii Retii -1 31--3-- Neher H amp Scholllnllr-middotikim 1 (20021 Sclf-regubted ilIKC with hiohl
gitted students l11e rok of cogn it i l l110t i UiOll] L pist cillologicd md cm [ron l1](llshy
[11 (1liahle linif Stili lin 3( I i iC)_-I
Nelson C E (I )8)) Skcwered on th unicorns horn 111lt iluion or the rr(lckotf between content and LTitk1 thinking in the lcaching otsliLllcC [n L X row (Edi
(nth II iii hI j(ltIlaquo rpp 17_-) (lshingrotl DC ]11[onll
Scimee (ltrehers AsOl iou ion
Nelson c E (1 )9() Studellt dicrsir rCl]uircs ditknm appro(lLhcs to collqc tcaciling
Cln in math llld sckncc iIIlT(dl Fiehtllltl(ri S((illhl -10 1(1)-1)
Niaz L amp Robinson Xi (1 j)2) IW1l algllrithmic mode [(l Ol1ccprur1 gCs[1lt in
1Il1lkrstanding rill blhavior of gibe An cpiSlclllOiogic11 pcrspccric Rt(Igt ii)(fshy
IIII 0 ic(bliologiCd hhl(iltiOi J(J )5-(H
Ilttry V ( II (I JeD) hJlII ojilferlld tllirl erb(lt r(ICOPJltJ iii tilt ieiln J Idllltll NeW York Holt Rinehart amp iINon
Plucker J A amp kInrire J (1 l9()) lldel11il sllnilbilin ill high-pOIClHill middle school StlldllltS Cifra (hlld I() --1middot1
Rahinmviu 0 CIar R (llJH)) Cq rulturc Ilnd proces in high U)11Pl lent plrr()rmOlllcmiddot In I D Horcmill 0 1 OBrkn ([k) 111 1111r1Ii1fmte4
11 perpeelIlc (PI -)-)8) ahjn~[oil DC rmCIIlCn ycltologkJI
-soc ia[i 0 n
RohimoJl amp Clinkcnbeard l R (1 ))8) Clftcdncss An cxccprlonaiirv examined
AIIlliltl1 RIIicll j) 11- 151
Ruh1I1 L amp RcI S ((()() Pancrn ohdi~rcglliatiotl jl(men of strHcS
lISC 11llOllg I[)v-Khiing mel high-lchicing univnsin sludlHs ROi lt11leu 8 14K-I
Rv(m 1 (I )k+) loniwring [Xl (ol1lprci1lnsion Inciiidud dirkrcllns in
ul gttandards JOIIiIId
SaL U (2004) A npls ()fhiftd adobccnrsoilld
Schummll 1 (I ))l 11 lOllccprualilllriol1 O(CpiSlcllloiogical hdicl~ and thcir
role 011 kamint In R (lrtlCr ( i A Alexander (Lds) dOllIiX( lid ilitJlC
(iOIl Itit tCXI 2i--fOI liillbJc 1 LlTClllC Erlblllll1
Scitorn1l1er 1 amp DUIlIlLil l 1Jrl Epistcmologicti bdd~ or littcd high chuol
studcllls RalIi 19 1-middot1 )(
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
SChOlllll1(
enul
J7I Shieci
d ir )l)-
Shore II
chilei JlIT
Shore H
dllf
i( ) Sowell
1()
i
Span I
Stcinc I
a rmiddot fl]
SrlillC1 i
In Srcrnh~l
L f Slnnh_
(
Suhotl1~
fhollLh
ch
11lt 111 __
~ ~ tcshy
ri
choo
DESICNED FiT
Schommer-AikinsL Duell 0 K amp Hurter R (2005) Epistemological mathshy
emarical probkm-solving beliefs and academic of middle school students
Ihe 105289-304 Shieer S amp ]1aker C J 199-) Enrichment and acceleration An meniew 1I1d new
directions In ~ Colangelo amp C Davis Haildboo edllcation 99-110) Boston Allm amp Bacon
Shore B M (2000) ktacognitiol1 and Hexibilitmiddot differences in how gifted
children think In R C Friedman amp B 1 Shore (Elk) rllllts ulljf)dillg CogshylIitioli and dlleopllllt 16--1Sn vrashil1gton DC American PsChological
Association
Shore B 1 amp Irving J (200j) Inquirv as a Il(dagogicallink hetween expnie lnc
giftedness111e lbili( lI1d inquin resc1ch group at 1cCili Lnhmiddotcrir
fwd tofld IlIteliirUllilidl O( 1)5-40
Shore B fL amp Lazar 1 (1996) differences in time alltlcatiol1 Irhlc-m
-8 11411-S49
Sowell L R 1cters()ll B S lhol11pon P 1 e1cuIllLmiddot S [ Il~nklt nill L amp lc)gl A V (2003l bpping cortical Cross rhe human lit~ pan MUIII
iVmoicillIr( () 309-51 i
Span )1 amp Oertool11-COrSIll iL R (19H6) Informatioll ng hmiddot intellectual
pupils sullillg Illarhcmuical prohlems Frill(tlliolldl Stil 1 Alarfeillrltio -
273-291 SteineL H H amp Carr 1 12(05) C
more preci undersundinf of Hrclgr RIIiCli 15 21)-21
denmiddotlopl11lnt in children Toward
di fferenccs ill i mel Iigencl Ldi(tltlOlIr
Stcimmiddotr H H amp Clrr 1 (200() 1 r(ldolIIl11t oproJIeil -ollilI Iii gijicrl lllirl Ilmgl~iiil) (fidllll lc(rr(J liml d(fo(illiilt to edliCtiolliI
I-bllppauge lY Ioa Science
Srnnbcrg R J (Ed) (191-12) flIIrll)(o ahliililll illllllgolec ~e York Cambridge
Unlnsir Press
StLrnberg RI (2()()~ L hroJd ie or il1telligencefllc thl(l~ of sllcccssful
COllilltilig lotrildmiddot Jritti(1 illlt R(tllc 55 15)-1 i-l
Sllbotnik R F (2()(Ul doicC1[ pathway to lmll1LIllC ill seicnlL Lcsom irom the
music COIlSLratoIY III P CLTmch- amp L ledcrlllltln (hisl SUOi([ (rII(lItioll [tllII
rnmitllloi( i1Hd pllblli 2)i-502) Burke lOS Pre
lhonl1sI- (200S) RCiing and
ethnicity Il()n~ gifted high SdlOUI sllIdcJl(
Wluing 1 (1989) Logical IllCe-sln to mlkc line graphs j(llnldl itl middotcima J( 3-1-3 -q
Veins[Ock 1 )culllan Y amp iaiuk 1 2()) I) liing thc point or [hL nomh
of wdcllts to icklltit Ltliaiouo argumiddot I11cnts )( 1) -94
Wilkinson V K amp 1)lt)1 i Ih influencc of collegc stmle-nt
logical Ull clecrlLi to h- i 11 ~ prO(SL~ ([Ier rcb iN UJ~Ji()
Vilkinsoll X K amp Sdmart l II I 9fCllhc oricllLltioll I gittLd
adolcsccnrs 11 tL (d 11[ model Reports hJ r6-l)-k
Young E (2001 hyJun(i rlh l)uildillg blocks ()tlir~ fJ COlriu j(gt--+H
A Guide to Recommended Practices
19
GALLAGHER20
Yurgelun-1()dd D A amp Kilgore X D (2006) harmiddotmiddotre8ted acridt in the prefrontal
cortex increases with age during adolescence A preliminary f1RI study Neuroscience Lmer406194-19()
Zhang L F (J 999) Furrher cross-cultural validation of rill theory of menul self-governshymenr journal 133 16)-1)1
Zhang L F amp atkins D (200 II Cognitivc dcvcloplllll1t llld stUdcnt approaches to
learning An investigation ofPerns theor~ vith Clullcse and US uniersitv students Higher EduCfltiol1 41239-2(1
SUSANr
We
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
p
4 GALLAGHER
or ofd~ltenc~~~Jl~nt ~[hrhe lack of~igrificance their curriculum How do we sustain gifted students desire to learn while still preparing thcm for college and
life At the very lease hoI can we keep them from skipping class The answers
to these questions lie in the qualitative differences gifted srudents bring into the
classroom New research on the brain may well provide us with nelV ways to map
and describe these differences (see Figure 1j Even no elidence of qualitative
differences from both psvciloiogy and education provide a strong rationale for
modifying conrenr ell1phlizing thinking strategies and using student perspecshy
~reatea n~~llil~~j~tt~rc~~~at~I~-goals that are respelrru[ consisrent with seco-zruv instruction
A Rationale for Multidimensional Content Differentiation
Copious Challenging Content
Cifted students spongc-like absorprion of new information is a defining trait
Cognitive scientists have isolated at least three skills related to IQ that comhine
to create an advantage in acquiring int()fJnatiol1 According to Steiner and Carr
(2()Ol) in LlI1rs who (1) react to new information quickly (2) accomrnodare new information or habituate quickly and OJ habituated inflHmation to seek
out new stimuli quickk grow into children with high IQs Ihese same fKtors-~
rapid inforlllati()n12roc(ss~lg habit~tio~~~f1~J)rCerenCe fO[rtweltv-also are crucial to expcrt perl~)rn1ancc
Betwecl]ligh=TcTZhildren and tTle expert adults arc gifted adolescents who also
(1) learn better when taught two to three times t~l~tcr than average (rapid response to srimuli) ren]SIl1hq FHncr- repetitions (Larson amp Richards 1991)
which suggcsts h~~bitl1atioll andr~r~_)1d better to opell-ended inquiry-orishy
emeJ instrucriol1 (noveir- seeking Sak 2004) preferring to learn somcthlllg~~~w evel1 Illorc than typical Iv popular hands-on activities ilthough il is impossible to
make GlllSal or developmcntal ties based on these separate bodies of research the
similarities arc clear
As gifted adolescents cng~lge in the cycle of seeking responding to and
accommodating new informarion they acql1irc an extensive knowledge base
which contributes to acadcmic SLiccess Helping gifted students acquire a subshystambl knowledge base is th( hr( csential component of an dfectile secondary
program
Should differenrinioll then foclls on intensive memorization tacts No
Gifted srudems consbremil report thlt the dominant cmphasi on LlCrual learnshy
ing leads to thcir disenchantment IIith school (Csikszenrmihahi Rarhunde amp Whalen 1993 Gallagher --larradine amp Coleman 199- Kmelskv amp Keighley
2003 Plucker amp 1clntir 1 )96) lhe extensive knmdeug hasc giftcd students
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
5 DESIGNED TO FIT
Adults often wonder what happened to the mind of a new adolescent as it often seems to have disappeared Ironically adolescents dont suffer from a lack of grey matter rather they have a surfeit A decade of research using Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) technology has revealed that brain development is much more dynamic than once thought particularly during adolescence Key findings include
1 Just before the teenage years the brain acquires a mass of new grey matshyter Grabner Neubauer and Stern (2006) reported this new brain growth peaks at around 11 for girls and 12 for boys
2 The new grey matter is deposited in the prefrontal cortex which controls executive functions impulse control deciSion-making reasoning and planning
3 Myelinization of an early adolescents prefrontal cortex is significantly less developed than an adults Myelin the insulation helps make strong efficient connections between neurons the neural connections manifest as thought or action Myelin develops as a result of exercising an area of the brain much as muscle develops as a result of exercising an arm or leg New and unexercised an adolescents new prefrontal cortex--the area that controls executive function-is relatively flabby and in need of a workout (Sowell et aI 2003)
4 Unable to efficiently use their flabby prefrontal cortex young teens rely on other regions of the brain including the amygdala which sends out impulsive gut reactions to respond to certain stimuli like facial expressions Adults use their prefrontal cortex to respond to the same stimuli Only in later adolescence does the teen brain begin to respond like an adults (Yurgelun-Todd amp Kilgore 2006)
5 Individuals with high measured IQ also tend to have more grey matter in the prefrontal cortex than individuals whose IQ is average or below (Haier Jung Yeo Head amp Alkire 2004) suggesting the opportunity to develop more or stronger executive control function
6 The preadolescent influx of grey matter is followed by attrition throughshyout adolescence Grabner and colleagues (2006) called this a pruning process that weeds out weak neural connections and retains stronger connections
For decades the assumption has been that secondary educators have been adding to a work in progress helping to mold a brain that has been around since a childs birth Current research replaces this picture with another 12-year-olds hurrying down crowded hallways each carrying a mass of untrained brain This image might serve as a call to action for any teacher but it is particularly important for gifted educators because the prefrontal cortex regions are critical for essentially all higher order cognitive functions (Grabner et aI 2006 p 436) Grabner et al noted the observed efficiency of prefrontal cortex activity in intelligent individuals suggests that they are malleable and responsive to training
The key to changing an unpredictable impulsive 1 2-year-old into a more self-possessed 22-year-old lies at least in part on the effective development of executive control processes Given the relationship between prefrontal matter and intelligence gifted students may well have more potential for executive control skill to develop-or waste Because the adolescent brain also will engage in winnowshying out unused or ineffective neural connections it seems incumbent upon gifted educators to pay special attention to this area during the secondary years
FIGURE 1 Neurological changes at adolescence
A Guide to Recommended Practices
6 GALLACHeR
develop is significant because more leads to different (Berliner 1986 as cited
in Shiever amp Maker 199~) Vith more content at their disposal gifted students
can make more connections and see more original relationships fen a strong
knowledge base facilitates and is facilitated by the development of advanced
domain-specific strategies and metacognitive knovvlcdge (Carr amp Alexander 1996 p 214) Over time these strategies accumulate and create an im perus toward
complex and abstract leH1s of understanding
Abstract Complex Content
Another form of diHerentiation panicularlv appropriate f(Jr gifted students
is exposure to abstracr cOIlClprual ideas Abstract reasoning creates its OWIl rc)rm of new content ro understand encompassing inrll1gible notions such as hypothshy
esis posing theorizing and analogous reasoning Bv implication srudents must
hlYe acces to abstract reasoning before they can succeed with curriculum that
rlquires designing experiments inrerpreting symbolic meaning or comparing
polic~ initiatives
Students are generally thought to have ~lCces to abstract thought with the onset
of adolescence and the acquisition of fiJrmal operational reasoning (Inhdder amp Piaget 1958) Svsttmatic differences between groups in the acquisition of formal
operational reasoning would provide compelling reawns (0 diff(rentiate in order to
capitalize on the early opportullity to begin honing these essential skill Berninger
and YHes (1995) present a thorough review of the literature on gifted students and
[(Hillal operations demollstrating that
1 Children move through the Pbgetian stages in the SHlll order but not on
the same timcline Cifted students acquire lHll1al operational reasoning
around ages 12-- 11 1110t other students arc still in the transition to f(Hl11al
operations It age 1 i 2 Cifted boys tend to enttr formal operations earlier than gifted girls ~nle
etfect size of this ditt(ren(e is smail and the male advantage dil11inishts
by bte adolescence
3 Cifted adolescents progress through substages of formal operations more
quickly than their age-mates
Cifted students have the Cclpacin f()r abstracr conceptual reasoning as many
as ) years ahead of their peers-thc equillIlent their emire illedle school (areers
Naturallr variability exists in both the gifted and average populations but still the
implications arc clear (itrcd srudents are readv to grapple with qualitatively dif
fercn t con ten t years ahead of thci l cLlssnu tes ()nce formal oper~ltions arc achieved
instruction should be dl~igncd ((lard mastering this new [(lrm of content as it
is critical for Sllccess in econdar ltCademics (Bitner Il)) I Cipson Abraham amp
Renner 1989 Hurst amp MilkCnt 19 ~latthevs amp McLaughlin 1994 McDonald
1 ()89 iaz amp Robinson 19()2 Xnwing 1989) Incorporating conceptual content
with a plentiful ElCtual base also prmides a means ofensuring that learning will not
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
7
r
i shy
[
J
[
DESIGNED TO FIT
fall into drill and rote memorization Concepts help organize facts resulting in more meaningful connections and expert-like thinking (Shore amp Irving 2005)
Disciplinary or Interdisciplinary Content
Understanding the need for a deep concept-centered knowledge base is only pardy useful it also is necessar~ to know how to focus the knowledge Compelling
arguments can be made in two directions On one hand opportunity for early
specialization is essential tor students with exemplary talent (jarvin amp Subotnik
2006) Early specialization also makes sense for many students whose chosen career
may require many years ofschooling On the other hand the modern age is marked by unique combinations of traditional disciplines into new fields (Klein 19(3) and innovation is often the resulr of cross-disciplinary application similar to the use of linguistics to decode the DNA sequence (Young 20tH) Ultimately tilL
most effective programs for gifted adolescents provide the choice ro eithergt) wide
or deep whil~ ensuring some exposure ro deep disciplinary thinking and original
interdisciplinary connections regardless of the direction students take In sum gifted students arc capable of learning substantially more content
than their peers They also have earlv capacity for abstract thought which both
adds a of contenr and helps organize bcmal inr(lrmation Building a gifted students knowledge baslt maklts sense especially because this knowledge base is a
predictor of academic sliccess Ensuring that gifted students fond as they are of novel tv remain engaged in learning requires the presentation of content that
bull presents information using instructional models that Elcilitate idenrificashy
tion and creation of meaningful connections
bull allmvs for inductive and deductivlt connections between facts and absrract ideas
bull incorporates time specifically f()1 cultivation of abstract reasoning and bull encourages either deep exploration of one diScipline (with exposure to
inrerdisciplinary thought) or wide exploration of several disciplines (with
exposure to deep exploration in one field)~or both
Frequent Opportunities for Higher Order Thinking
Ihe knowledge base gifted students acquire may he impressie but it is ultishy
mnely fairly useless unless rhev pur that knowledge ro work with the help thinking strategies SurprisinglY (he research base on gifted adolecents unique
chinking arrribnrcs is thin in both gifted education and cognitive science research
on how cognitive difhrenccs dCIclop is virtuallv nonexistent (Steiner amp Carr 2003)
The research that is available tltnds to tocus on three interrelated areas ( JI strategic thinking metacognitioI1 and (5) cxpen thinking
Thinking to Slow Down Gifted students generallv use the same set of srratltgies that other students use so in terms of sheer number of
A Guide to Recommended Practices
8 CALLAGHER
strategies employed they do not seem difFerent from other students (Hong 1999)
However gifted students learn more quickly and when r~lCcd with a challenging
task they use more complex ftlfmS of strategies and often seleer sophisticated
strategies lSteiner amp Carr 2006) Having more contenr at their disposal they have
the capacity to use thinking strategies to more original ends As obvious as it may
seem however it bears emphasizing that there is a difFerence berween knowing a
strategy and using a strategy Evidence suggests that gifted studenrs only use their
critical thinking srrategies when they perceive a need that is when the challenge
of a task merits their use (Hong 199))
Gifted students advantage with thinking strategies is especiallv apparent when
they are engaged in prohlem solving Cdred srudenrs tend to show a greater explicit
knowledge of problcm-sohing stages know more problem-solving strategies and
are more adepr in selecting strategies to usc when t~1Ced h an open-ended problem
111ey also are more inclined to switch from one strategy to another when necesshy
sary (Kanevskv 1 ()92) [he sucngrh gitred studenrs demonstrate is evident even
in the absence of direct instruction in problem solving gifted stLIdenrs seem to
invent strltegies when needed (lonrague 1991) Xhile they 1re problem solving
t1st-learning gifted studenrs slow down taking more time to plan and strategize
(Davidson amp Sternberg 1 ()84 Shore amp Lazar 1996) [n addition they show early
tendencies toward expert-like behavior when prohlem solving content knowledge
may strengthen this tendencv (Cherne Jinter amp Cherney 20()))
In sunllnary gitred smdcl1[s dCl11onsrrlfe superior performance in a wide range
of thinking skills which they use well and selectivelv However gifted stlldellts
use these skills onh when faced with meaningful challenges Ensuring that gifted
srudenrs develop their skills in critical thinking requires
bull consranr exposure to challenging conrent
bull tasks more challenging than aYcrage requiring the use of critical
thinking
bull reflective time to engage III problem finding planning and cOllcepmai
reasoning and
bull an oer111 p1(e curriculum 1Ild instruction in which time saved a a result
of ra~lid COlHenr learning is spellt on more difficult complex thinking
Afelflcog1lii(JIl In the cark 1))-10 Sternberg (I (JH2 propoed that l11ctacognishy
tion the ability to Oversee and manage thinking is an important flCwr in gifted
pertl)rmlt1nceAfter two decades of research a more specitlc hut unexpected picshy
mre has emerged ofgittcd studel[~ llse of l11ctacognitiol1 AltilOugh it is dear that
mcr1cognirion is a component or cXLmpL1r pertl)rmaI1Ce gifted students do nO[
show a clcar-cut pcrtlJrmance adYll1tagl In tlcr there lfC on two areas of metashy
cognition where gitred studclHS COlbistlIlrV show superior performance (1) gifted
student knowledge 1hollt speLdic iemling strategics and i) their indination to
usc a skill in a ncw usual gteIting Iso known IS far rrlmt~I (Carr amp Alexanmiddot
der 1996 Robinson 0 ClinhmiddotnbLlld 19()x Span amp Cherroom-Corsmit 1986)
Other s[udie of l11l[~K()gl1itiun hem onk a slight adYltllHlge gitred studenrs
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
son
iu
pn till
(tr
11 [
the
S( 1
th
d~ tic
() le1
tiH
flU
dmiddot l
Lu
Inl I
1lt1 li
j ri
bull
pot
hlll I
SlrLI
Pl Sh )
DtSIGNED TO FIT 9
~-~I~Jl~
-itd
~~l
lLmiddot [
- 1HJ
tlcd
ci[lmiddotd
ci picshy
cr tilar
I()11 to
~ cxanshy l)-())
lt lLLms
some show inferior performance among gifted youth (Dresel amp Haugwitz 2005
Ludlow amp Woodrum 1982) At first glance these findings seem counrerintuitive Why wouldnt gifted stushy
dents show the same advantage in metacognition that they have in learning content
and using thinking skills Carr and Alexander (1996) presenred three plausible
explanations First the tasks llsed in metacognitive research especially research on
near transfer may be so easy that gifted srudenrs do well without monitoring their
performance 111is would explain vhy gifted students are similar to their peers in
their use of metacognitive skills on near transfer tasks but consistently perform betshy
ter on far transfer tasks Far transfer tasks offer a greater challenge requiring gifted
smdems to engage in sdf-monitoring Drescl and Haugwitz (200)) conducted a
classroom-based study that reintorces this notion finding that gifted students did
nO[ use self-regulating behavior if thev thought an assignment was easy Based on
their study they concluded the finding that students with high abilities use
strategies less frequentlv in regular school lessons can be seen as an indication that
their learning environment is inadequately low (p I )) In order ro provide
gifced students with the same amount of practice in self-regulation as average stushy
dems they must work as frequently with tasks the find challenging-I11e alternashy
tive is to leave these skills undeveloped underdeveloped or poorly ckvcloped
Second the relationship between metacognition and IQ lllay have a threshshy
old dlCct lQ may predict skilled LIse of metacognition up to a point Once the
threshold is crossed I(~ docs not guarantee that children will acquire or usc
cognitive skills such as Illcracognitioll believed to promote high achievement
1l1ese cognitie kills appear to deeop instead our ofel11crging expertise (Carr
amp Alexander 19W) p 214) 111 iId the generic conrent-free nature of research tasks may be both u nrcal istic
and unlikelv to [eltal gifted performance difFerences Research Oil expert perforshy
mance suggests that cognitivc monitoring realh is on necessary after thc student
develops I deep and signif1cam body of discipline-based coment (Chi Glaser amp Em 19RR Rabinowitz amp Glaser 19Wi)
In SLIm gifted students have accts) to seWregulatory lwhaviors but lise them
inconsistenrh- Llltctive self-regulation is relatcd both to ltlcademic success and to
adlllt expert percml) 111 cO Ensuring that gifted students have adequate practice
wirh a wide range of metltlcognitivc skills requires
bull constanr exposure ro chaltnging Cllmcnr
bull learn j ng tasks slIfficicn tk d iftlcul r to requi re sOl f-regulation 1l1el bull immersion in disciplinan-hased CO I1(C 11(
EjJfrtis( and 1migh r i nw expert performance prmides ] guideshy
post trll planning programs ttlr gifred adolescenrs because we aspire for Ihll11 ro become experts or innomiddotlt1wrs in their chosen field Research filldings conrinul ro
strengthen the rit between gifrlmiddotd srudenrs thought processes and rhar of domainshy
specitlc expertS (Gorodetsb 0 -hlir 2003 Klll till an Genrile amp Bacr 200) Shore 2(00) Common charlc-rnirics ~llreadv discllssed include rapid acquisirion
A Guide to Recommended Practices
GALLAGHER10
of content skill and flexibility in critical thinking and self-regulation Gifted srudenrs seem to intuitively have some expert-like skills (Kaufman er ai 2005) while others are only acquired through training (Cherney et ai 2005)
Reviewing the literature on expertise Carr and Alexander (1996) pointed our
that it more than skill and ability to be an expert Although experts need sufficient general ability (IQ) to perf()fm at a high level other such as task
commitmenr a sttOng knowledge and social suppOrt are more important tor developing expertise and promoting achievement through expertise (p 214) Ihe list of teguiremenrs for expertise also includes perspective forward problem solving persistence risk taking and tacit knowledge professional language and behaviors Jarvin amp Sllbornik 2006 Shore 2000 Sternberg 2(03) Expershy
tise in this larger sense can be devcoped using curriculum and instruction
emphasize problem solving open-ended questions construction ofideas multiple
perspectives and exposure to disciplinary experts (Gallagher 2006 Shore amp Irving
2005 Sternberg 2003 Sllbornik 2003) [11 sum gifted students cognitivl characteristics parallel those of adult lxperts
Ensuring thar gifted srudlnts continue to develop lxperr-like skills requires
bull exposure to explicit and tacit dbciplinary knowledge bull time to engage in flexibll thinking with disciplinary and interdisciplinary
content
bull curriculum and instruction thar incorporate inquiry cOl1ceptuallearning and authentic conrexts and
bull opportunities f(lI problem solving and mentorships
The Role of Student Perspective Epistemology
Still missing is perhaps t11l most importanr rlCror abollt the education ofgifred adole~cellts Etons to design effective programs and promote new kinds of practice will be for naught if thc srudems themselves do not recognize the significance or
valuc in (he tasks assigned [ he t(JrI11 of perspecrivl in question is tpistemgy ones abo lit rhe nature
of knowledge Perry (1 presel1[ed a developmental scheme that made direct
and pragmatic application [0 the classroom tor it described both how students
views of knowledge change Ocr time and also the powerful eteCt ditering views
have in the classroom Perrys scheme presents nine distincr positions that can be collapsed into four broad suges as sUlllmarized by Gallagher (2006)
Dualism Marked by a black-and-white perspective srudents at rhis sragl
believe aillegirimate questions have certain anSWlrs So-called questions without answers are jmt nOl1seme questions pointless
Multiplicity Stlldents acknowledge that there arc a kw unanswered
questions hut hdiCL dur in the absence of an ltlnswer all opinions on the matter are egualk alid
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Student
III
kl(
[h
hu [he ~J
() r
lV ~ rk Illmiddot
I I ~
id
11
kJ
11 DESIGNED TO FIT
middot dti t
1 __1
tl
n~
u~url
- l i rlcl
cLnt~
~ leWS
-1-1 be
lll1
Contextual Relativism Unanswered questions are investigated using the
tools provided by each discipline each discipline approaches questions in a different wav Certain amwers are unlikely bur a best ansver can
be achieved using the proper rools
CommitmentDialectic Theories are used [() set directions for imporshy
cam questions most of which have no right or wrong answers Gaining understanding requires building upon the possibilities presented by dara as interpreted by a consciously selected point ofview bur with willingness
to change perspective if rhe need arises (p 436)
l~lble 1 presents the f(lUr stages aligned with the beliefs about learning that Iecomshy
pany each stage For a more concrete example comider Carl and Cedric two students waitshy
ing for class to begin Carl believes rlwt knowledge means fH-rS and being knowledgeable means remembering lots of bets Cedric 011 the other band
thinks that knowledge is the abilitv to combine bcts to create ideas For Cedric
being knowledgeable isnt aboll[ the numher of ElCts he knows its ahout how the [Kts can form and rd()fIll to create diffltrent ideas Their teacher Ms Morshy
gan starts her lecture on the Trail oflCars f()(using on the sequence of even ts
detailing what who and when Carl picks up his pen and starts studiously takshying notes Cedric slumps down in his desk grumbling [lCtoids-lbe two boys
hear the same lccrure bom the same teacher but their ditterent belids abour
knowledge afftC[ bow willing they are to accept the inf()rmation as meaningful or valid
A numher ofrheories nmv artempt to describe aspects ofepistel11ological develshyopment (Baxter 1agolda 1987 King amp Kitchener 1994 Schommer 1994) Each theory describes sequen tiaL developmentalmovemenr from a low or naive stance in which knowledge is equated with flctllal inr()Jmation and memorization to
a high or mature stance in which bets are used ro build theories from a
consciollsly selected point ofview but with willingness w change perspective if the need arises (C~lllagher 2006 p 43(1) In the example above Carl holds a navc
stallce and thu~ is happy to gather up a list of taCtS from the lecture Cedrics stance
is more mature and he wishes the flcts had been embedded in more meaningful ideas
Je ComprelJemizie Irnptlct (1Fpitemgy At one level the impact of Carls
and Cedrics differing heliefs is immediately apparent Students are not like ro learn what the do 110 helilVl to be Illeaningfu-or at least they wont learn it
t()r long After two decades of reselrch into the effeC( of epistemology on karning
it is clear that the impact extends hevond whether students like whl( thl learn to
a number of other important ilCldll1lic Ol[COll1es dCllciemil ilcJitlJcmcnt Using a structural equation
analysis Cano (2005) f()ulld that high school students epistemological stance had
both direct and indirect effects 011 academic achievement Similar results have been
A Guide to Recommended Practices
Stages of Epistemological
Development(3
co Beliefs 3 Associated With the Positionl shyVgt rI)
1 rI) ~
~ -shy
Instruction That C
Matches~
shyshy Epistemological Vgt ngt Stage 0 l- -lt Instruction That Vgt Encourages c shy Movement to a ~ Higher Stage
Earlier Positions
r 0 ~ ~
T 4~ r r r ~
TABLI 1
Perrys StagesPositions of Epistemological Reasoning and Related Instructional Strategies
-
Dualism Multiplicity Relativism
Knowledge is cer- Some questions have I Knowledge is interpreted tam (right or wrong) no certain answers in and unambiquous these cases knowledge
I in context distinguishing better from worse answers
and truth are subjec- Irequires selecting theories Authorities (teachers) live so everyones opinshy Ih b jt he quPtiouknow The Truth ion is eq~llyvalid
Activities that help Practice in comparshy Practice in creating students develop skill ing hypotheses and
comparing and select-
in memorization and theories acknowledgshy ing preferable theoshyrecall mnemonics etc ing all possibilities retical models
in exoert behaviors
Exposure to lems with more than in different disciplines one right answer andl to conduct research or more than one construct theories approach to a solution and make decisions
RanCJe of Typical School Senior
Range of Gifted High School Senior
~ ~ I g C shy ~ n ~ -5 ~ ~ ~ ~ shy
~- ~ ~r r rshy - shyr r l
~ r- r
2-~ r- shy shy
~
r r
I CommitmentDialectic
Knowledge methods are and uncertain Choices require analysis and values
Later Positions
n Z 0 l ln 0r
~ shy~
N
( raquo shyraquo CI J
0
13 DESIGNED TO FIT
found with middle school srudenrs (Schommer-Aikins Duell amp 11l[ter 2005) Studenrs at lower levels may have trouble correcring misconceptions and draw
only fact-based information from inquiry-oriented environments (Ryan ] 984) Epistemological Jtanee aJectJ ildvanced academic performance Students with
more advanced belief have an easier time building logical arguments (Weinstock
Kellman amp Tabak 2(04) they tend to choose thinking strategies that Slipport
deep rather than surface learning (Cano 2005 Zhang amp Watkins 2(01) Kitchshy
enet (1983) also suggested that students selectioll of meracognirive strategies can
be affected by their epis((mologicai beliefs Support for this idea comes from a study by Ruban and Reis (2006) who found that high-achieving students tended
to select cnhancemem oriented learning strategies while lower achieving srudents
selected survival oriented strategies
Illstruction can encourage )WIemem to higber epistemological elcTelChers
can affecr changes in students epistemological thinking through intentionally
structllred learning experiences (Kloss 1094 Kronholm 1993l Strategies recomshy
mended to dCc1op epistemological thinking include using ill-structured problems
and instructional straregics thar allow srudenrs to examine their assumptions anashy
lyze data that present different conHicting perspectiyes and then make decisions
(King amp Kitchener 20(4) Devoting some time to direct instruction about tbe
narure of the discipline helps develop higher levels of reasoning (Bdl 20(4) vhmltltch bet1 iecn instructiol t7 lid epistemoogiCtl Itllnee (pnspect i IJt) colltributes
to jruurrltiol[ (wd disillusiolllJlflll Cedric didnt respond well when Ms Marrin
started a f1Cr-based lecture Over time he will simply decide that school is trivial
or worse meaningless Had Ms 1artin staned imtead with a discllssion of the
violation of Native Americans sense of personhood Cedric wOllld have been
thrilled and Carl would hae been lost This kind of disparity creates barriers to
learning (Nelson 19()6 PelTY 1(70) --Jebel and Schommer-Aikins (2002) f()lnd
that a mismatch between insrruction and stance caused work avoidance among
some high school phYsics students Lovell and lunnefY (2004) ltJUnd that srudents
even found small-group work Illore Itisfing when they Vere grouped according
to sranct (perspecrhc)
Giftrd tlldCIIpound1 tmel to tlJead iii epistemgical dezclopllllllt Stll(iiLs of adoshylescents doculllent that cpistemological belicts mature in a pndioablc dcvelopshy
mental sequcnce (Cano 200) Zhang amp latk ins 2(01) In parallcl to formal
operational reasoning gifred rdoiesccl1t move through episremologicli stges in
the same sequence (Ihomas 2()08) but tend to be a stage or rwo ahead of orlIer
rhe same age (Arlin amp LCirr Il))X Goldberger 1981 Schollll11er I Dunnell
1997 ~n1Omas) 2008 Wilkinsoll I Iaxwcll 1991 iilkinsoll amp Schw~lrtz 19X-1
Lible 1 provides a general seme of the distribution of senior year studcm baSell on existing research
Adult experts tend to holt IlrlzlIIeal epi)tllIIologimlliClls -Ihc epistcl11ojogicri
framework also provides a UHl1lCtiOIl to anuther aspect of experrisc -CIO the
disciplines the behaviors and l([irlllk associared with mature episrel11ologv arc
A Guide to Recommended Practices
[
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
gt ~ ~--------------
GALLAGHER14
considered essential for advanced authentic work (Buehl amp Alexander 2005 Felder 1997 Henderson 1995 Kloss 1994 Muis 20(4)
Connections With G~fted Education Evidence that gifted students tend ro
be somewhat ahead of their age-mates in epistemological development follows
naturally from the data on formal operations reponed above However other
inreresting connections bring this theon into cohesion with existing knowledge
of giftltd students for example there is some indication that people who prlttCr
Intuition on the Jhers-Briggs Type Inventory tend [() have higher epistemologishy
cal stances (Zhang 199()) Cifted rudents overwhelmingly report this prdlrenCl
(Sak 2004) and the connecrion gives further evidencc that giftcd students will
respond best to open-ended inquiry-oriented learning environments Similarly
it explains gifted adolescents positive response to mentOr relationships Like
all adolescents gifted reenagers want to see similarities bcrween themselves and
others in mentors they find kindred spirits who think abour ideas from similar
frames of mind
Most exciting perhaps is the COil necrion between epistell1oosY md expertise
Not only do gifted students show earlv potential to achieve the expens high levels
of reasoning bur also epistell1ologicalll10deis provide a guide to he p explain how [() move all students closer to authentic higher order reasoning Callagher (l99X) suggested that models slIch as these would make effecdve frameworks for designing
high school curriculum providing an organic model for differentiation Based on
his study of adolescent epistelllological beliefs Cano (200raquo) concurred
it is necessary to take into account nor only students previous knowlshy
edge and learning strategies bur also their learning approaches and
epistemological beliefs Secondlv wc should work directly to try to
enhance [he depth of learning approaches and the complexity of episshy
temological belid~ as way of improving academic achievemenc (p 217)
Finally this framework reinforces the notion that the outcomes tt)r ignorshy
ing srudents beliefs are grave Srudents have trouble accepting the relevance of
instrtlLtion that is out of sync with their stag (Perr- ]970) a finding that is
consonant with the well-established knowledge that gifred adolescents reject munshy
dane repetitive curriculum hlrrher gifted students operating at higher levels than
other students find instrllction orienred towards the majorit uninspiring and
communicate their feelings through underachievement More sltriollsly perhaps
Nelson (1989) cautioned that excessive time spent in low-lenl curriculum actively
builds a wall of habit that blocks the path to higher level reasoning Even rapid
acceleration can havc this d~magillg eftect ifstudenrs are onlv accelerated into nev
low-level content It) prmidl a climl[e read for higher order thinking educators
must present COIltCIH that is accelerated vertically as well as horizomalh-
CI [
tCl ~I
1
lhe IS 110 i I
and fUc
hest n~II
15
bull - r
~ shy
~
~n( )1shy
()f ut I
l1UI1shy
[hm
inti
lpid
DLltiCNEl) TO m
Complete Coherence Evidence-Based Recommendations for
Differentiation in Secondary School
Each of the perspecrivcs considercc1 in this rationale is championed h differshy
ent researchers operating from different paradigms and using differenr research
techniques Even so their respectin findings arc remarkably similar
1 Gifted adolescents nced exposure [0 ~l larger quanrity of coment that
the find dnllenging Beginning at least in middle schooL abstract conshy
tenr should he a srandard part of their curriculum I he importlnle of developing a plenriful high-quality wcll of information i essLlHial as
it is a precursor to using higher order thinking ll1etJcognitivc thinking
and abstract thinking Cifted students will lot adequJtek develop their
thinking skills without this knowledge base 2 A quality knowledge bZlse is neCssary hilt notutticilmiddotllt ItH developing
thinking skilk Ciftecl studenrs 1lUt be presented with Ierning experishy
ences that require them to engage their critical thinking skills and metlshy
cognitive skills If they do not find their assignments challenging their
brains willilot engage their higher order functions T()gether content and
strategv med along ith metacognition predict academic perf()[mltlnce
making the simultalleous devdopmenr of these three paramount
3 Cifted students show earl~ promise t()r deydoping expertise Capitalizi ng
on that earlv promise requires instruction where stlldems Gl1 practice the
qualities of expcrtbe including open-ended imtruction inquiry-based
instruction problcm-oriented instrucrion field experiences and menrorshy
ships all cCl1[ercd 011 high-qualitv disciplinarv or imcrdisciplinary content
Cifted srudents arc most lihk to sec this instruction as relevant and draw
maximum value hom it
4 Expertisc requircs more thall contLflt and skill habits of mind ~llld
~llhaI1C1d epistemological re~lsoning also arc essentiaL If we aspirc for gifted students-~or for allY s(Udel1l~--to hecome creative productive leadshy
ers in their chosen field curriculutH ~lJld instruction should he selected to
develop these simultaneoush- and include exposure to the philosophies
and (thics of thc disciplines
The absence of a qualin- differerlliated secondary progrll11 flH gifted students
is not a neutral position it is 1 choice that will result in deficit skill dCeopmcnt
and student apathy At worr it ill result in the disillusionment some of the
best minds in the country
A Guide to Recommended Practices
i
GALLAGHER16
References
Arlin P K amp Levin L (1998) A deelopmenta perspc((ic on giftedness
HeetlrcIoltnlld I )4~~5i(1 Baxter Jvlagolda Jvl B (J 987) Comparing open-ended inteljcs lnd standardized mea- Hair
sun of inrelieefUal development ollilla Strfmt PCIJoiJle 28 443~44S -i
BdL E (2004) Promoring StUdUHS argumenr consrrncriOll and collahorativc debate in thc Hell science classfl)om rn ~ 1 C Linn E A Davis amp P Bell (Eds J Imimlt J1lrOltrrIOtS h~middot
seimC IIiCilioll (pp 11 i-145) lal11ah 1 Lawrence Erlballl11
rkrningcr V amp Yates C (J (95) Formal operational thought in rhe gifted A postshy H(ln~
Piagetian pnspecriC Hu(ti (nilli I) 220~224 HUN
Rirnn B L (l991 Formal operHional nlsolling Illodes Predictors of critical thinking
abilit ies alld grade assigned Iw reacher in sciencc and nlarhemltltics il[ student in
grades nine rhrough [tke Ollljli ill Sciei( 28 2()-2~4 InhclcL
Buehl 1 amp Alnlnder P (2001) lorivarion and pnr~HlllaJl(e ditferemes in srudelJ[
dOllllin-specific epiSrllllUI()~illt11 bel iet profiles ilIHlIll FdllClitiolfll NCilllrchOII1i
middoti2 (N-- - 2(
ClIlO I (200i) Lpistcl]ologicai bclid~ IJlld a[lproaches to Icllning Ih~ir through lh secol1dan chool wd their influcncc Oil lCademic pn~lrn1alKe Bllti_f lotmil
tdlildtiOllit -) 205- 221 Kanl
ClIl 1 amp Alexander I (I )()6) Xhere giftd children do 1Ild do nO[ cxcel on llleracogshy
n irin lasb Noel) NcriCiI 18 12lt 1( 1)
Cherne L 11 VinrCl J amp Chlrnc j1 l (200i) NucleH problem s()h-ln~ Kanl
elise stUlh of expert-I1Oicl differences hllliSlletoll fI(the iVdmtI of
Seillle w 1-- hi 11 T H (lascL R amp iarr 1 J (itk) (19HHl Ihc Itttn If
NJ Lawrence Erlbaulll King I
CsiksCIHIll ihali 1 1 Ib rJundt K amp Whakn S ( 1 )94) ]tIIIItc tieillgcn 11( mou of I 1 JifCCC-S Iiiirifllllln Bmrou ( PrlmiddotSS ~
[lidson I L amp I I tJ)Hj)lh roll ofimighr in ilwlIeuual ~ifredncs King l
(dial Child (jlltrtal ]8 is-hi dc Urnl 1 amp lLlll~jl 1 11()()iIlhlmiddot riariollshil hcmlln 1biliriLs and slt1rshy
regllbrld Ic~lrning l ilkncc ti) imcraLTiolb with leIck-mil sdt~lomcpt Ild gender
iglllbiit) lirlI ( 2() 1 ) S
Felder R (19~J 1 kCl our s1Udenrs Dac hrrlLl and Ruhcllo ChtlJiicd KItin
Fdll(iltOi31 10(- j() d Cllb~hcr J l-Llrrallilll C ( 0 (olcn1lt1ll ~1 R (J 9F) UlilIkllgc or boredom Ciftld Ii
tlldIHS ics on rhir ((Pi1 NUiCli 19 132~l(1 iI
Callagher S A (l)lt)H 11 he ((lld 10 ulrinl rhinking I he scheille lilt llleH1in~ht KIo I
ditttTcnriation ii Hill(IiII 8li iL)) 12-20 ic Calb~her S 1 (2()()()1 l rhmiddot to slience expcrtiscmiddot In F Dixon amp S Kronl](I
0100[1 ( l IitI)i u (lllllIO1 [PI 1()~middot+6(J) I1U) TX (n
Irufroc k Prns larson 1
CipsoJ] 1 brdulll 1 0 Ic1111ll L t 19S)1 Rcll(ollhil hC[Cll1 t(lrmal-opltTniullll dlOughr and ttllhclrud ditkulrie in geflLtiS problem IUIilidl ofRlsldJ(f ill --I J gt~
Slilll( ( S 1 1--S2 I Loell (
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
17 DESIGNED TO fiT
ul
IX
Gorodetsky 1 amp Klavir R (2003) What can we learn from how giftedaverage pupils
describe their processes of problem solving) Learning amp Instruction 13 305-326 Grabner R Neubauer A amp Srern E (2006) Superior performance and neural efficiencv
Ihe impact of intelligence and expertise Brain Research Bulletin 69 422-439 Haicr R J JUl1g R E Yeo R A Head K amp Alkire M r (200t) Srrllcrural brain
variHion and general inrelligence Netlroimage J L 425-435 Henderson S (J 995) Vh do I hae ro be here) The Advanced Placement srudelH in
firs(~vear composition Problems and isslles in cognitive development journal ondar) Gifted EduCtlri(Jl 7 )24-532
Hong L (19)9) Swdying the mind of rhe gifted ROfper Relieu 21 244-2)2 Hurst R amp Milkenr 11 (1996) Facilitaring successful prediccion problem gt(living in
biology through application ofskill theor jOllnJal ill Scimce ) 541-)52
Inhclder fl amp Piager j (19)8) the cililrflIor1I IlrO-fi((
Jew York Basic fI()oks
Jarvin L amp Subomik R (2006) Understanding elitc taient ill acadcmil domaim A
dcvclopmcl1(al ttajccwn from hasic ahilities O scholarlv producrivitvcmisfr In E A Dixon amp S 1 Moon (Eek) thc hillidbook (pp205-220) vhco TX Prufrock Press
Kancsky L (1)92) Gifred children and thc learning process Imights on both tlom rhe
rcsearch III E Miinks amp Xi Peters (Eds) J(tlmr r1( (pp 1))middot161) Asscn
Ihe 0lctherlands Van CorClUll
Kanevsky L amp KeighlcvL (2003) 1~) produce or nor ro produce understanding hOi dum and the honor in umkrlchkl111cnr RCIitll26 2()2R
Kauflll]n J C Gentile C r amp Bllf J (200)) Do gifted sflllknr writers and crec)(ive
writing experts raIL lTlcni in till same Child QlltlltCrl 4) 2()O-265 King P v1 amp Kitchener K S (1)94) jll(zr1II IllI
flild illtcllltfli ill flrocsCm fllld (lIn San
Francisco Josse~ Bass
King l 1 amp Kitchencr K S (2004) Iefieltivc judgllllm Ihcorv and research on thl
dtveioplllelH ()f pircmic assllmptions through adulrhood Fdilolfiolltll
YJ(I) )-lR
Kitchener K S (1 )HI) Cogllition Il1ctalugnirioll and episttmic cognition A rhrcltlevel
model of cognitivc pnllc fl1I11II11I )11 dOjJ 1IItl1 I 6 222~252 Klein J T (I ))3) Blurring CLIcking mel crossing Permcation and thc fracturing of
discipline In E lesscr-DlidO D R ShUlllV amp D J Shan (Eds) (Pl 1 Hi-21 I) Charlnwsdle Uniersin
of Virginia Press
Kloss R J (19)4) nudge is hest Helping srudems throllgh rhe Iern schellll of intll
Iccruat Jeel0pllhnr I] I i 1-1 lH
Kronholm M 1 (19J) l Ihe i mp)ct of dCIdnpmenral instruction on rcHen ill iudgmellL
RCIieU ofHigber ErlIldtillll I i 1))-middot2)) Larson R V amp Richmk 1 11 1 L)J 1 ugusr) Boredom in (hi middle scilll() I
ears Blaming schoolgt erus gtIamitlg mdenrs 1l11encdll jOIiJIiI OjliJI(I[JOII 9)
418-44) Lmell C X amp 0unnen j i 2()()i i Tesling the adulr dCelopme1( I()CI of [lahel
hvpothesis HOI1l0gillCOll hmiddot lln position mllaboldtile learning groups and grcldu
ate student sarisfanion tllrtr 11 IY) 1)0
A Guide to Recommended Practices
L GtgtLlA(HER18
Ludlow B L amp Voodrum D T (1)82) Problem-sohing and aerag~
Icarners on a multiple discrimination task (ild
Matthews D amp lkLwghlin T 1)94) EHects otleHIlr-cclHcln acthitics on
achievement and students preterences in [So hiih 5c11Ol lLtrSes HI(tPWdl
fllld AOo)li -8 28)-286 ivlcDonJkl J (I )Kl) Cogniric dcnlopmenr Jnd the rlUdU or geometric contcllr
Rlslrd ill f(ltbcJlldti f((cilwm 20 -11-)4
vlontlgue 1 (19() 1 J Cihnl and Icnning diabkd gifrcd smdllls lise of knowledge and
usc of mrriHIllHicli and prohlem sohing srrarcgic I I(uuioll oftII
11 Y))-+II
middotluis K (2004) ierson(rl cpisrcmologv and marhcmuics - critical rcic and smhesis
of research RcIlli lifdll(lIli()Ii Retii -1 31--3-- Neher H amp Scholllnllr-middotikim 1 (20021 Sclf-regubted ilIKC with hiohl
gitted students l11e rok of cogn it i l l110t i UiOll] L pist cillologicd md cm [ron l1](llshy
[11 (1liahle linif Stili lin 3( I i iC)_-I
Nelson C E (I )8)) Skcwered on th unicorns horn 111lt iluion or the rr(lckotf between content and LTitk1 thinking in the lcaching otsliLllcC [n L X row (Edi
(nth II iii hI j(ltIlaquo rpp 17_-) (lshingrotl DC ]11[onll
Scimee (ltrehers AsOl iou ion
Nelson c E (1 )9() Studellt dicrsir rCl]uircs ditknm appro(lLhcs to collqc tcaciling
Cln in math llld sckncc iIIlT(dl Fiehtllltl(ri S((illhl -10 1(1)-1)
Niaz L amp Robinson Xi (1 j)2) IW1l algllrithmic mode [(l Ol1ccprur1 gCs[1lt in
1Il1lkrstanding rill blhavior of gibe An cpiSlclllOiogic11 pcrspccric Rt(Igt ii)(fshy
IIII 0 ic(bliologiCd hhl(iltiOi J(J )5-(H
Ilttry V ( II (I JeD) hJlII ojilferlld tllirl erb(lt r(ICOPJltJ iii tilt ieiln J Idllltll NeW York Holt Rinehart amp iINon
Plucker J A amp kInrire J (1 l9()) lldel11il sllnilbilin ill high-pOIClHill middle school StlldllltS Cifra (hlld I() --1middot1
Rahinmviu 0 CIar R (llJH)) Cq rulturc Ilnd proces in high U)11Pl lent plrr()rmOlllcmiddot In I D Horcmill 0 1 OBrkn ([k) 111 1111r1Ii1fmte4
11 perpeelIlc (PI -)-)8) ahjn~[oil DC rmCIIlCn ycltologkJI
-soc ia[i 0 n
RohimoJl amp Clinkcnbeard l R (1 ))8) Clftcdncss An cxccprlonaiirv examined
AIIlliltl1 RIIicll j) 11- 151
Ruh1I1 L amp RcI S ((()() Pancrn ohdi~rcglliatiotl jl(men of strHcS
lISC 11llOllg I[)v-Khiing mel high-lchicing univnsin sludlHs ROi lt11leu 8 14K-I
Rv(m 1 (I )k+) loniwring [Xl (ol1lprci1lnsion Inciiidud dirkrcllns in
ul gttandards JOIIiIId
SaL U (2004) A npls ()fhiftd adobccnrsoilld
Schummll 1 (I ))l 11 lOllccprualilllriol1 O(CpiSlcllloiogical hdicl~ and thcir
role 011 kamint In R (lrtlCr ( i A Alexander (Lds) dOllIiX( lid ilitJlC
(iOIl Itit tCXI 2i--fOI liillbJc 1 LlTClllC Erlblllll1
Scitorn1l1er 1 amp DUIlIlLil l 1Jrl Epistcmologicti bdd~ or littcd high chuol
studcllls RalIi 19 1-middot1 )(
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
SChOlllll1(
enul
J7I Shieci
d ir )l)-
Shore II
chilei JlIT
Shore H
dllf
i( ) Sowell
1()
i
Span I
Stcinc I
a rmiddot fl]
SrlillC1 i
In Srcrnh~l
L f Slnnh_
(
Suhotl1~
fhollLh
ch
11lt 111 __
~ ~ tcshy
ri
choo
DESICNED FiT
Schommer-AikinsL Duell 0 K amp Hurter R (2005) Epistemological mathshy
emarical probkm-solving beliefs and academic of middle school students
Ihe 105289-304 Shieer S amp ]1aker C J 199-) Enrichment and acceleration An meniew 1I1d new
directions In ~ Colangelo amp C Davis Haildboo edllcation 99-110) Boston Allm amp Bacon
Shore B M (2000) ktacognitiol1 and Hexibilitmiddot differences in how gifted
children think In R C Friedman amp B 1 Shore (Elk) rllllts ulljf)dillg CogshylIitioli and dlleopllllt 16--1Sn vrashil1gton DC American PsChological
Association
Shore B 1 amp Irving J (200j) Inquirv as a Il(dagogicallink hetween expnie lnc
giftedness111e lbili( lI1d inquin resc1ch group at 1cCili Lnhmiddotcrir
fwd tofld IlIteliirUllilidl O( 1)5-40
Shore B fL amp Lazar 1 (1996) differences in time alltlcatiol1 Irhlc-m
-8 11411-S49
Sowell L R 1cters()ll B S lhol11pon P 1 e1cuIllLmiddot S [ Il~nklt nill L amp lc)gl A V (2003l bpping cortical Cross rhe human lit~ pan MUIII
iVmoicillIr( () 309-51 i
Span )1 amp Oertool11-COrSIll iL R (19H6) Informatioll ng hmiddot intellectual
pupils sullillg Illarhcmuical prohlems Frill(tlliolldl Stil 1 Alarfeillrltio -
273-291 SteineL H H amp Carr 1 12(05) C
more preci undersundinf of Hrclgr RIIiCli 15 21)-21
denmiddotlopl11lnt in children Toward
di fferenccs ill i mel Iigencl Ldi(tltlOlIr
Stcimmiddotr H H amp Clrr 1 (200() 1 r(ldolIIl11t oproJIeil -ollilI Iii gijicrl lllirl Ilmgl~iiil) (fidllll lc(rr(J liml d(fo(illiilt to edliCtiolliI
I-bllppauge lY Ioa Science
Srnnbcrg R J (Ed) (191-12) flIIrll)(o ahliililll illllllgolec ~e York Cambridge
Unlnsir Press
StLrnberg RI (2()()~ L hroJd ie or il1telligencefllc thl(l~ of sllcccssful
COllilltilig lotrildmiddot Jritti(1 illlt R(tllc 55 15)-1 i-l
Sllbotnik R F (2()(Ul doicC1[ pathway to lmll1LIllC ill seicnlL Lcsom irom the
music COIlSLratoIY III P CLTmch- amp L ledcrlllltln (hisl SUOi([ (rII(lItioll [tllII
rnmitllloi( i1Hd pllblli 2)i-502) Burke lOS Pre
lhonl1sI- (200S) RCiing and
ethnicity Il()n~ gifted high SdlOUI sllIdcJl(
Wluing 1 (1989) Logical IllCe-sln to mlkc line graphs j(llnldl itl middotcima J( 3-1-3 -q
Veins[Ock 1 )culllan Y amp iaiuk 1 2()) I) liing thc point or [hL nomh
of wdcllts to icklltit Ltliaiouo argumiddot I11cnts )( 1) -94
Wilkinson V K amp 1)lt)1 i Ih influencc of collegc stmle-nt
logical Ull clecrlLi to h- i 11 ~ prO(SL~ ([Ier rcb iN UJ~Ji()
Vilkinsoll X K amp Sdmart l II I 9fCllhc oricllLltioll I gittLd
adolcsccnrs 11 tL (d 11[ model Reports hJ r6-l)-k
Young E (2001 hyJun(i rlh l)uildillg blocks ()tlir~ fJ COlriu j(gt--+H
A Guide to Recommended Practices
19
GALLAGHER20
Yurgelun-1()dd D A amp Kilgore X D (2006) harmiddotmiddotre8ted acridt in the prefrontal
cortex increases with age during adolescence A preliminary f1RI study Neuroscience Lmer406194-19()
Zhang L F (J 999) Furrher cross-cultural validation of rill theory of menul self-governshymenr journal 133 16)-1)1
Zhang L F amp atkins D (200 II Cognitivc dcvcloplllll1t llld stUdcnt approaches to
learning An investigation ofPerns theor~ vith Clullcse and US uniersitv students Higher EduCfltiol1 41239-2(1
SUSANr
We
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
5 DESIGNED TO FIT
Adults often wonder what happened to the mind of a new adolescent as it often seems to have disappeared Ironically adolescents dont suffer from a lack of grey matter rather they have a surfeit A decade of research using Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) technology has revealed that brain development is much more dynamic than once thought particularly during adolescence Key findings include
1 Just before the teenage years the brain acquires a mass of new grey matshyter Grabner Neubauer and Stern (2006) reported this new brain growth peaks at around 11 for girls and 12 for boys
2 The new grey matter is deposited in the prefrontal cortex which controls executive functions impulse control deciSion-making reasoning and planning
3 Myelinization of an early adolescents prefrontal cortex is significantly less developed than an adults Myelin the insulation helps make strong efficient connections between neurons the neural connections manifest as thought or action Myelin develops as a result of exercising an area of the brain much as muscle develops as a result of exercising an arm or leg New and unexercised an adolescents new prefrontal cortex--the area that controls executive function-is relatively flabby and in need of a workout (Sowell et aI 2003)
4 Unable to efficiently use their flabby prefrontal cortex young teens rely on other regions of the brain including the amygdala which sends out impulsive gut reactions to respond to certain stimuli like facial expressions Adults use their prefrontal cortex to respond to the same stimuli Only in later adolescence does the teen brain begin to respond like an adults (Yurgelun-Todd amp Kilgore 2006)
5 Individuals with high measured IQ also tend to have more grey matter in the prefrontal cortex than individuals whose IQ is average or below (Haier Jung Yeo Head amp Alkire 2004) suggesting the opportunity to develop more or stronger executive control function
6 The preadolescent influx of grey matter is followed by attrition throughshyout adolescence Grabner and colleagues (2006) called this a pruning process that weeds out weak neural connections and retains stronger connections
For decades the assumption has been that secondary educators have been adding to a work in progress helping to mold a brain that has been around since a childs birth Current research replaces this picture with another 12-year-olds hurrying down crowded hallways each carrying a mass of untrained brain This image might serve as a call to action for any teacher but it is particularly important for gifted educators because the prefrontal cortex regions are critical for essentially all higher order cognitive functions (Grabner et aI 2006 p 436) Grabner et al noted the observed efficiency of prefrontal cortex activity in intelligent individuals suggests that they are malleable and responsive to training
The key to changing an unpredictable impulsive 1 2-year-old into a more self-possessed 22-year-old lies at least in part on the effective development of executive control processes Given the relationship between prefrontal matter and intelligence gifted students may well have more potential for executive control skill to develop-or waste Because the adolescent brain also will engage in winnowshying out unused or ineffective neural connections it seems incumbent upon gifted educators to pay special attention to this area during the secondary years
FIGURE 1 Neurological changes at adolescence
A Guide to Recommended Practices
6 GALLACHeR
develop is significant because more leads to different (Berliner 1986 as cited
in Shiever amp Maker 199~) Vith more content at their disposal gifted students
can make more connections and see more original relationships fen a strong
knowledge base facilitates and is facilitated by the development of advanced
domain-specific strategies and metacognitive knovvlcdge (Carr amp Alexander 1996 p 214) Over time these strategies accumulate and create an im perus toward
complex and abstract leH1s of understanding
Abstract Complex Content
Another form of diHerentiation panicularlv appropriate f(Jr gifted students
is exposure to abstracr cOIlClprual ideas Abstract reasoning creates its OWIl rc)rm of new content ro understand encompassing inrll1gible notions such as hypothshy
esis posing theorizing and analogous reasoning Bv implication srudents must
hlYe acces to abstract reasoning before they can succeed with curriculum that
rlquires designing experiments inrerpreting symbolic meaning or comparing
polic~ initiatives
Students are generally thought to have ~lCces to abstract thought with the onset
of adolescence and the acquisition of fiJrmal operational reasoning (Inhdder amp Piaget 1958) Svsttmatic differences between groups in the acquisition of formal
operational reasoning would provide compelling reawns (0 diff(rentiate in order to
capitalize on the early opportullity to begin honing these essential skill Berninger
and YHes (1995) present a thorough review of the literature on gifted students and
[(Hillal operations demollstrating that
1 Children move through the Pbgetian stages in the SHlll order but not on
the same timcline Cifted students acquire lHll1al operational reasoning
around ages 12-- 11 1110t other students arc still in the transition to f(Hl11al
operations It age 1 i 2 Cifted boys tend to enttr formal operations earlier than gifted girls ~nle
etfect size of this ditt(ren(e is smail and the male advantage dil11inishts
by bte adolescence
3 Cifted adolescents progress through substages of formal operations more
quickly than their age-mates
Cifted students have the Cclpacin f()r abstracr conceptual reasoning as many
as ) years ahead of their peers-thc equillIlent their emire illedle school (areers
Naturallr variability exists in both the gifted and average populations but still the
implications arc clear (itrcd srudents are readv to grapple with qualitatively dif
fercn t con ten t years ahead of thci l cLlssnu tes ()nce formal oper~ltions arc achieved
instruction should be dl~igncd ((lard mastering this new [(lrm of content as it
is critical for Sllccess in econdar ltCademics (Bitner Il)) I Cipson Abraham amp
Renner 1989 Hurst amp MilkCnt 19 ~latthevs amp McLaughlin 1994 McDonald
1 ()89 iaz amp Robinson 19()2 Xnwing 1989) Incorporating conceptual content
with a plentiful ElCtual base also prmides a means ofensuring that learning will not
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
7
r
i shy
[
J
[
DESIGNED TO FIT
fall into drill and rote memorization Concepts help organize facts resulting in more meaningful connections and expert-like thinking (Shore amp Irving 2005)
Disciplinary or Interdisciplinary Content
Understanding the need for a deep concept-centered knowledge base is only pardy useful it also is necessar~ to know how to focus the knowledge Compelling
arguments can be made in two directions On one hand opportunity for early
specialization is essential tor students with exemplary talent (jarvin amp Subotnik
2006) Early specialization also makes sense for many students whose chosen career
may require many years ofschooling On the other hand the modern age is marked by unique combinations of traditional disciplines into new fields (Klein 19(3) and innovation is often the resulr of cross-disciplinary application similar to the use of linguistics to decode the DNA sequence (Young 20tH) Ultimately tilL
most effective programs for gifted adolescents provide the choice ro eithergt) wide
or deep whil~ ensuring some exposure ro deep disciplinary thinking and original
interdisciplinary connections regardless of the direction students take In sum gifted students arc capable of learning substantially more content
than their peers They also have earlv capacity for abstract thought which both
adds a of contenr and helps organize bcmal inr(lrmation Building a gifted students knowledge baslt maklts sense especially because this knowledge base is a
predictor of academic sliccess Ensuring that gifted students fond as they are of novel tv remain engaged in learning requires the presentation of content that
bull presents information using instructional models that Elcilitate idenrificashy
tion and creation of meaningful connections
bull allmvs for inductive and deductivlt connections between facts and absrract ideas
bull incorporates time specifically f()1 cultivation of abstract reasoning and bull encourages either deep exploration of one diScipline (with exposure to
inrerdisciplinary thought) or wide exploration of several disciplines (with
exposure to deep exploration in one field)~or both
Frequent Opportunities for Higher Order Thinking
Ihe knowledge base gifted students acquire may he impressie but it is ultishy
mnely fairly useless unless rhev pur that knowledge ro work with the help thinking strategies SurprisinglY (he research base on gifted adolecents unique
chinking arrribnrcs is thin in both gifted education and cognitive science research
on how cognitive difhrenccs dCIclop is virtuallv nonexistent (Steiner amp Carr 2003)
The research that is available tltnds to tocus on three interrelated areas ( JI strategic thinking metacognitioI1 and (5) cxpen thinking
Thinking to Slow Down Gifted students generallv use the same set of srratltgies that other students use so in terms of sheer number of
A Guide to Recommended Practices
8 CALLAGHER
strategies employed they do not seem difFerent from other students (Hong 1999)
However gifted students learn more quickly and when r~lCcd with a challenging
task they use more complex ftlfmS of strategies and often seleer sophisticated
strategies lSteiner amp Carr 2006) Having more contenr at their disposal they have
the capacity to use thinking strategies to more original ends As obvious as it may
seem however it bears emphasizing that there is a difFerence berween knowing a
strategy and using a strategy Evidence suggests that gifted studenrs only use their
critical thinking srrategies when they perceive a need that is when the challenge
of a task merits their use (Hong 199))
Gifted students advantage with thinking strategies is especiallv apparent when
they are engaged in prohlem solving Cdred srudenrs tend to show a greater explicit
knowledge of problcm-sohing stages know more problem-solving strategies and
are more adepr in selecting strategies to usc when t~1Ced h an open-ended problem
111ey also are more inclined to switch from one strategy to another when necesshy
sary (Kanevskv 1 ()92) [he sucngrh gitred studenrs demonstrate is evident even
in the absence of direct instruction in problem solving gifted stLIdenrs seem to
invent strltegies when needed (lonrague 1991) Xhile they 1re problem solving
t1st-learning gifted studenrs slow down taking more time to plan and strategize
(Davidson amp Sternberg 1 ()84 Shore amp Lazar 1996) [n addition they show early
tendencies toward expert-like behavior when prohlem solving content knowledge
may strengthen this tendencv (Cherne Jinter amp Cherney 20()))
In sunllnary gitred smdcl1[s dCl11onsrrlfe superior performance in a wide range
of thinking skills which they use well and selectivelv However gifted stlldellts
use these skills onh when faced with meaningful challenges Ensuring that gifted
srudenrs develop their skills in critical thinking requires
bull consranr exposure to challenging conrent
bull tasks more challenging than aYcrage requiring the use of critical
thinking
bull reflective time to engage III problem finding planning and cOllcepmai
reasoning and
bull an oer111 p1(e curriculum 1Ild instruction in which time saved a a result
of ra~lid COlHenr learning is spellt on more difficult complex thinking
Afelflcog1lii(JIl In the cark 1))-10 Sternberg (I (JH2 propoed that l11ctacognishy
tion the ability to Oversee and manage thinking is an important flCwr in gifted
pertl)rmlt1nceAfter two decades of research a more specitlc hut unexpected picshy
mre has emerged ofgittcd studel[~ llse of l11ctacognitiol1 AltilOugh it is dear that
mcr1cognirion is a component or cXLmpL1r pertl)rmaI1Ce gifted students do nO[
show a clcar-cut pcrtlJrmance adYll1tagl In tlcr there lfC on two areas of metashy
cognition where gitred studclHS COlbistlIlrV show superior performance (1) gifted
student knowledge 1hollt speLdic iemling strategics and i) their indination to
usc a skill in a ncw usual gteIting Iso known IS far rrlmt~I (Carr amp Alexanmiddot
der 1996 Robinson 0 ClinhmiddotnbLlld 19()x Span amp Cherroom-Corsmit 1986)
Other s[udie of l11l[~K()gl1itiun hem onk a slight adYltllHlge gitred studenrs
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
son
iu
pn till
(tr
11 [
the
S( 1
th
d~ tic
() le1
tiH
flU
dmiddot l
Lu
Inl I
1lt1 li
j ri
bull
pot
hlll I
SlrLI
Pl Sh )
DtSIGNED TO FIT 9
~-~I~Jl~
-itd
~~l
lLmiddot [
- 1HJ
tlcd
ci[lmiddotd
ci picshy
cr tilar
I()11 to
~ cxanshy l)-())
lt lLLms
some show inferior performance among gifted youth (Dresel amp Haugwitz 2005
Ludlow amp Woodrum 1982) At first glance these findings seem counrerintuitive Why wouldnt gifted stushy
dents show the same advantage in metacognition that they have in learning content
and using thinking skills Carr and Alexander (1996) presenred three plausible
explanations First the tasks llsed in metacognitive research especially research on
near transfer may be so easy that gifted srudenrs do well without monitoring their
performance 111is would explain vhy gifted students are similar to their peers in
their use of metacognitive skills on near transfer tasks but consistently perform betshy
ter on far transfer tasks Far transfer tasks offer a greater challenge requiring gifted
smdems to engage in sdf-monitoring Drescl and Haugwitz (200)) conducted a
classroom-based study that reintorces this notion finding that gifted students did
nO[ use self-regulating behavior if thev thought an assignment was easy Based on
their study they concluded the finding that students with high abilities use
strategies less frequentlv in regular school lessons can be seen as an indication that
their learning environment is inadequately low (p I )) In order ro provide
gifced students with the same amount of practice in self-regulation as average stushy
dems they must work as frequently with tasks the find challenging-I11e alternashy
tive is to leave these skills undeveloped underdeveloped or poorly ckvcloped
Second the relationship between metacognition and IQ lllay have a threshshy
old dlCct lQ may predict skilled LIse of metacognition up to a point Once the
threshold is crossed I(~ docs not guarantee that children will acquire or usc
cognitive skills such as Illcracognitioll believed to promote high achievement
1l1ese cognitie kills appear to deeop instead our ofel11crging expertise (Carr
amp Alexander 19W) p 214) 111 iId the generic conrent-free nature of research tasks may be both u nrcal istic
and unlikelv to [eltal gifted performance difFerences Research Oil expert perforshy
mance suggests that cognitivc monitoring realh is on necessary after thc student
develops I deep and signif1cam body of discipline-based coment (Chi Glaser amp Em 19RR Rabinowitz amp Glaser 19Wi)
In SLIm gifted students have accts) to seWregulatory lwhaviors but lise them
inconsistenrh- Llltctive self-regulation is relatcd both to ltlcademic success and to
adlllt expert percml) 111 cO Ensuring that gifted students have adequate practice
wirh a wide range of metltlcognitivc skills requires
bull constanr exposure ro chaltnging Cllmcnr
bull learn j ng tasks slIfficicn tk d iftlcul r to requi re sOl f-regulation 1l1el bull immersion in disciplinan-hased CO I1(C 11(
EjJfrtis( and 1migh r i nw expert performance prmides ] guideshy
post trll planning programs ttlr gifred adolescenrs because we aspire for Ihll11 ro become experts or innomiddotlt1wrs in their chosen field Research filldings conrinul ro
strengthen the rit between gifrlmiddotd srudenrs thought processes and rhar of domainshy
specitlc expertS (Gorodetsb 0 -hlir 2003 Klll till an Genrile amp Bacr 200) Shore 2(00) Common charlc-rnirics ~llreadv discllssed include rapid acquisirion
A Guide to Recommended Practices
GALLAGHER10
of content skill and flexibility in critical thinking and self-regulation Gifted srudenrs seem to intuitively have some expert-like skills (Kaufman er ai 2005) while others are only acquired through training (Cherney et ai 2005)
Reviewing the literature on expertise Carr and Alexander (1996) pointed our
that it more than skill and ability to be an expert Although experts need sufficient general ability (IQ) to perf()fm at a high level other such as task
commitmenr a sttOng knowledge and social suppOrt are more important tor developing expertise and promoting achievement through expertise (p 214) Ihe list of teguiremenrs for expertise also includes perspective forward problem solving persistence risk taking and tacit knowledge professional language and behaviors Jarvin amp Sllbornik 2006 Shore 2000 Sternberg 2(03) Expershy
tise in this larger sense can be devcoped using curriculum and instruction
emphasize problem solving open-ended questions construction ofideas multiple
perspectives and exposure to disciplinary experts (Gallagher 2006 Shore amp Irving
2005 Sternberg 2003 Sllbornik 2003) [11 sum gifted students cognitivl characteristics parallel those of adult lxperts
Ensuring thar gifted srudlnts continue to develop lxperr-like skills requires
bull exposure to explicit and tacit dbciplinary knowledge bull time to engage in flexibll thinking with disciplinary and interdisciplinary
content
bull curriculum and instruction thar incorporate inquiry cOl1ceptuallearning and authentic conrexts and
bull opportunities f(lI problem solving and mentorships
The Role of Student Perspective Epistemology
Still missing is perhaps t11l most importanr rlCror abollt the education ofgifred adole~cellts Etons to design effective programs and promote new kinds of practice will be for naught if thc srudems themselves do not recognize the significance or
valuc in (he tasks assigned [ he t(JrI11 of perspecrivl in question is tpistemgy ones abo lit rhe nature
of knowledge Perry (1 presel1[ed a developmental scheme that made direct
and pragmatic application [0 the classroom tor it described both how students
views of knowledge change Ocr time and also the powerful eteCt ditering views
have in the classroom Perrys scheme presents nine distincr positions that can be collapsed into four broad suges as sUlllmarized by Gallagher (2006)
Dualism Marked by a black-and-white perspective srudents at rhis sragl
believe aillegirimate questions have certain anSWlrs So-called questions without answers are jmt nOl1seme questions pointless
Multiplicity Stlldents acknowledge that there arc a kw unanswered
questions hut hdiCL dur in the absence of an ltlnswer all opinions on the matter are egualk alid
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Student
III
kl(
[h
hu [he ~J
() r
lV ~ rk Illmiddot
I I ~
id
11
kJ
11 DESIGNED TO FIT
middot dti t
1 __1
tl
n~
u~url
- l i rlcl
cLnt~
~ leWS
-1-1 be
lll1
Contextual Relativism Unanswered questions are investigated using the
tools provided by each discipline each discipline approaches questions in a different wav Certain amwers are unlikely bur a best ansver can
be achieved using the proper rools
CommitmentDialectic Theories are used [() set directions for imporshy
cam questions most of which have no right or wrong answers Gaining understanding requires building upon the possibilities presented by dara as interpreted by a consciously selected point ofview bur with willingness
to change perspective if rhe need arises (p 436)
l~lble 1 presents the f(lUr stages aligned with the beliefs about learning that Iecomshy
pany each stage For a more concrete example comider Carl and Cedric two students waitshy
ing for class to begin Carl believes rlwt knowledge means fH-rS and being knowledgeable means remembering lots of bets Cedric 011 the other band
thinks that knowledge is the abilitv to combine bcts to create ideas For Cedric
being knowledgeable isnt aboll[ the numher of ElCts he knows its ahout how the [Kts can form and rd()fIll to create diffltrent ideas Their teacher Ms Morshy
gan starts her lecture on the Trail oflCars f()(using on the sequence of even ts
detailing what who and when Carl picks up his pen and starts studiously takshying notes Cedric slumps down in his desk grumbling [lCtoids-lbe two boys
hear the same lccrure bom the same teacher but their ditterent belids abour
knowledge afftC[ bow willing they are to accept the inf()rmation as meaningful or valid
A numher ofrheories nmv artempt to describe aspects ofepistel11ological develshyopment (Baxter 1agolda 1987 King amp Kitchener 1994 Schommer 1994) Each theory describes sequen tiaL developmentalmovemenr from a low or naive stance in which knowledge is equated with flctllal inr()Jmation and memorization to
a high or mature stance in which bets are used ro build theories from a
consciollsly selected point ofview but with willingness w change perspective if the need arises (C~lllagher 2006 p 43(1) In the example above Carl holds a navc
stallce and thu~ is happy to gather up a list of taCtS from the lecture Cedrics stance
is more mature and he wishes the flcts had been embedded in more meaningful ideas
Je ComprelJemizie Irnptlct (1Fpitemgy At one level the impact of Carls
and Cedrics differing heliefs is immediately apparent Students are not like ro learn what the do 110 helilVl to be Illeaningfu-or at least they wont learn it
t()r long After two decades of reselrch into the effeC( of epistemology on karning
it is clear that the impact extends hevond whether students like whl( thl learn to
a number of other important ilCldll1lic Ol[COll1es dCllciemil ilcJitlJcmcnt Using a structural equation
analysis Cano (2005) f()ulld that high school students epistemological stance had
both direct and indirect effects 011 academic achievement Similar results have been
A Guide to Recommended Practices
Stages of Epistemological
Development(3
co Beliefs 3 Associated With the Positionl shyVgt rI)
1 rI) ~
~ -shy
Instruction That C
Matches~
shyshy Epistemological Vgt ngt Stage 0 l- -lt Instruction That Vgt Encourages c shy Movement to a ~ Higher Stage
Earlier Positions
r 0 ~ ~
T 4~ r r r ~
TABLI 1
Perrys StagesPositions of Epistemological Reasoning and Related Instructional Strategies
-
Dualism Multiplicity Relativism
Knowledge is cer- Some questions have I Knowledge is interpreted tam (right or wrong) no certain answers in and unambiquous these cases knowledge
I in context distinguishing better from worse answers
and truth are subjec- Irequires selecting theories Authorities (teachers) live so everyones opinshy Ih b jt he quPtiouknow The Truth ion is eq~llyvalid
Activities that help Practice in comparshy Practice in creating students develop skill ing hypotheses and
comparing and select-
in memorization and theories acknowledgshy ing preferable theoshyrecall mnemonics etc ing all possibilities retical models
in exoert behaviors
Exposure to lems with more than in different disciplines one right answer andl to conduct research or more than one construct theories approach to a solution and make decisions
RanCJe of Typical School Senior
Range of Gifted High School Senior
~ ~ I g C shy ~ n ~ -5 ~ ~ ~ ~ shy
~- ~ ~r r rshy - shyr r l
~ r- r
2-~ r- shy shy
~
r r
I CommitmentDialectic
Knowledge methods are and uncertain Choices require analysis and values
Later Positions
n Z 0 l ln 0r
~ shy~
N
( raquo shyraquo CI J
0
13 DESIGNED TO FIT
found with middle school srudenrs (Schommer-Aikins Duell amp 11l[ter 2005) Studenrs at lower levels may have trouble correcring misconceptions and draw
only fact-based information from inquiry-oriented environments (Ryan ] 984) Epistemological Jtanee aJectJ ildvanced academic performance Students with
more advanced belief have an easier time building logical arguments (Weinstock
Kellman amp Tabak 2(04) they tend to choose thinking strategies that Slipport
deep rather than surface learning (Cano 2005 Zhang amp Watkins 2(01) Kitchshy
enet (1983) also suggested that students selectioll of meracognirive strategies can
be affected by their epis((mologicai beliefs Support for this idea comes from a study by Ruban and Reis (2006) who found that high-achieving students tended
to select cnhancemem oriented learning strategies while lower achieving srudents
selected survival oriented strategies
Illstruction can encourage )WIemem to higber epistemological elcTelChers
can affecr changes in students epistemological thinking through intentionally
structllred learning experiences (Kloss 1094 Kronholm 1993l Strategies recomshy
mended to dCc1op epistemological thinking include using ill-structured problems
and instructional straregics thar allow srudenrs to examine their assumptions anashy
lyze data that present different conHicting perspectiyes and then make decisions
(King amp Kitchener 20(4) Devoting some time to direct instruction about tbe
narure of the discipline helps develop higher levels of reasoning (Bdl 20(4) vhmltltch bet1 iecn instructiol t7 lid epistemoogiCtl Itllnee (pnspect i IJt) colltributes
to jruurrltiol[ (wd disillusiolllJlflll Cedric didnt respond well when Ms Marrin
started a f1Cr-based lecture Over time he will simply decide that school is trivial
or worse meaningless Had Ms 1artin staned imtead with a discllssion of the
violation of Native Americans sense of personhood Cedric wOllld have been
thrilled and Carl would hae been lost This kind of disparity creates barriers to
learning (Nelson 19()6 PelTY 1(70) --Jebel and Schommer-Aikins (2002) f()lnd
that a mismatch between insrruction and stance caused work avoidance among
some high school phYsics students Lovell and lunnefY (2004) ltJUnd that srudents
even found small-group work Illore Itisfing when they Vere grouped according
to sranct (perspecrhc)
Giftrd tlldCIIpound1 tmel to tlJead iii epistemgical dezclopllllllt Stll(iiLs of adoshylescents doculllent that cpistemological belicts mature in a pndioablc dcvelopshy
mental sequcnce (Cano 200) Zhang amp latk ins 2(01) In parallcl to formal
operational reasoning gifred rdoiesccl1t move through episremologicli stges in
the same sequence (Ihomas 2()08) but tend to be a stage or rwo ahead of orlIer
rhe same age (Arlin amp LCirr Il))X Goldberger 1981 Schollll11er I Dunnell
1997 ~n1Omas) 2008 Wilkinsoll I Iaxwcll 1991 iilkinsoll amp Schw~lrtz 19X-1
Lible 1 provides a general seme of the distribution of senior year studcm baSell on existing research
Adult experts tend to holt IlrlzlIIeal epi)tllIIologimlliClls -Ihc epistcl11ojogicri
framework also provides a UHl1lCtiOIl to anuther aspect of experrisc -CIO the
disciplines the behaviors and l([irlllk associared with mature episrel11ologv arc
A Guide to Recommended Practices
[
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
gt ~ ~--------------
GALLAGHER14
considered essential for advanced authentic work (Buehl amp Alexander 2005 Felder 1997 Henderson 1995 Kloss 1994 Muis 20(4)
Connections With G~fted Education Evidence that gifted students tend ro
be somewhat ahead of their age-mates in epistemological development follows
naturally from the data on formal operations reponed above However other
inreresting connections bring this theon into cohesion with existing knowledge
of giftltd students for example there is some indication that people who prlttCr
Intuition on the Jhers-Briggs Type Inventory tend [() have higher epistemologishy
cal stances (Zhang 199()) Cifted rudents overwhelmingly report this prdlrenCl
(Sak 2004) and the connecrion gives further evidencc that giftcd students will
respond best to open-ended inquiry-oriented learning environments Similarly
it explains gifted adolescents positive response to mentOr relationships Like
all adolescents gifted reenagers want to see similarities bcrween themselves and
others in mentors they find kindred spirits who think abour ideas from similar
frames of mind
Most exciting perhaps is the COil necrion between epistell1oosY md expertise
Not only do gifted students show earlv potential to achieve the expens high levels
of reasoning bur also epistell1ologicalll10deis provide a guide to he p explain how [() move all students closer to authentic higher order reasoning Callagher (l99X) suggested that models slIch as these would make effecdve frameworks for designing
high school curriculum providing an organic model for differentiation Based on
his study of adolescent epistelllological beliefs Cano (200raquo) concurred
it is necessary to take into account nor only students previous knowlshy
edge and learning strategies bur also their learning approaches and
epistemological beliefs Secondlv wc should work directly to try to
enhance [he depth of learning approaches and the complexity of episshy
temological belid~ as way of improving academic achievemenc (p 217)
Finally this framework reinforces the notion that the outcomes tt)r ignorshy
ing srudents beliefs are grave Srudents have trouble accepting the relevance of
instrtlLtion that is out of sync with their stag (Perr- ]970) a finding that is
consonant with the well-established knowledge that gifred adolescents reject munshy
dane repetitive curriculum hlrrher gifted students operating at higher levels than
other students find instrllction orienred towards the majorit uninspiring and
communicate their feelings through underachievement More sltriollsly perhaps
Nelson (1989) cautioned that excessive time spent in low-lenl curriculum actively
builds a wall of habit that blocks the path to higher level reasoning Even rapid
acceleration can havc this d~magillg eftect ifstudenrs are onlv accelerated into nev
low-level content It) prmidl a climl[e read for higher order thinking educators
must present COIltCIH that is accelerated vertically as well as horizomalh-
CI [
tCl ~I
1
lhe IS 110 i I
and fUc
hest n~II
15
bull - r
~ shy
~
~n( )1shy
()f ut I
l1UI1shy
[hm
inti
lpid
DLltiCNEl) TO m
Complete Coherence Evidence-Based Recommendations for
Differentiation in Secondary School
Each of the perspecrivcs considercc1 in this rationale is championed h differshy
ent researchers operating from different paradigms and using differenr research
techniques Even so their respectin findings arc remarkably similar
1 Gifted adolescents nced exposure [0 ~l larger quanrity of coment that
the find dnllenging Beginning at least in middle schooL abstract conshy
tenr should he a srandard part of their curriculum I he importlnle of developing a plenriful high-quality wcll of information i essLlHial as
it is a precursor to using higher order thinking ll1etJcognitivc thinking
and abstract thinking Cifted students will lot adequJtek develop their
thinking skills without this knowledge base 2 A quality knowledge bZlse is neCssary hilt notutticilmiddotllt ItH developing
thinking skilk Ciftecl studenrs 1lUt be presented with Ierning experishy
ences that require them to engage their critical thinking skills and metlshy
cognitive skills If they do not find their assignments challenging their
brains willilot engage their higher order functions T()gether content and
strategv med along ith metacognition predict academic perf()[mltlnce
making the simultalleous devdopmenr of these three paramount
3 Cifted students show earl~ promise t()r deydoping expertise Capitalizi ng
on that earlv promise requires instruction where stlldems Gl1 practice the
qualities of expcrtbe including open-ended imtruction inquiry-based
instruction problcm-oriented instrucrion field experiences and menrorshy
ships all cCl1[ercd 011 high-qualitv disciplinarv or imcrdisciplinary content
Cifted srudents arc most lihk to sec this instruction as relevant and draw
maximum value hom it
4 Expertisc requircs more thall contLflt and skill habits of mind ~llld
~llhaI1C1d epistemological re~lsoning also arc essentiaL If we aspirc for gifted students-~or for allY s(Udel1l~--to hecome creative productive leadshy
ers in their chosen field curriculutH ~lJld instruction should he selected to
develop these simultaneoush- and include exposure to the philosophies
and (thics of thc disciplines
The absence of a qualin- differerlliated secondary progrll11 flH gifted students
is not a neutral position it is 1 choice that will result in deficit skill dCeopmcnt
and student apathy At worr it ill result in the disillusionment some of the
best minds in the country
A Guide to Recommended Practices
i
GALLAGHER16
References
Arlin P K amp Levin L (1998) A deelopmenta perspc((ic on giftedness
HeetlrcIoltnlld I )4~~5i(1 Baxter Jvlagolda Jvl B (J 987) Comparing open-ended inteljcs lnd standardized mea- Hair
sun of inrelieefUal development ollilla Strfmt PCIJoiJle 28 443~44S -i
BdL E (2004) Promoring StUdUHS argumenr consrrncriOll and collahorativc debate in thc Hell science classfl)om rn ~ 1 C Linn E A Davis amp P Bell (Eds J Imimlt J1lrOltrrIOtS h~middot
seimC IIiCilioll (pp 11 i-145) lal11ah 1 Lawrence Erlballl11
rkrningcr V amp Yates C (J (95) Formal operational thought in rhe gifted A postshy H(ln~
Piagetian pnspecriC Hu(ti (nilli I) 220~224 HUN
Rirnn B L (l991 Formal operHional nlsolling Illodes Predictors of critical thinking
abilit ies alld grade assigned Iw reacher in sciencc and nlarhemltltics il[ student in
grades nine rhrough [tke Ollljli ill Sciei( 28 2()-2~4 InhclcL
Buehl 1 amp Alnlnder P (2001) lorivarion and pnr~HlllaJl(e ditferemes in srudelJ[
dOllllin-specific epiSrllllUI()~illt11 bel iet profiles ilIHlIll FdllClitiolfll NCilllrchOII1i
middoti2 (N-- - 2(
ClIlO I (200i) Lpistcl]ologicai bclid~ IJlld a[lproaches to Icllning Ih~ir through lh secol1dan chool wd their influcncc Oil lCademic pn~lrn1alKe Bllti_f lotmil
tdlildtiOllit -) 205- 221 Kanl
ClIl 1 amp Alexander I (I )()6) Xhere giftd children do 1Ild do nO[ cxcel on llleracogshy
n irin lasb Noel) NcriCiI 18 12lt 1( 1)
Cherne L 11 VinrCl J amp Chlrnc j1 l (200i) NucleH problem s()h-ln~ Kanl
elise stUlh of expert-I1Oicl differences hllliSlletoll fI(the iVdmtI of
Seillle w 1-- hi 11 T H (lascL R amp iarr 1 J (itk) (19HHl Ihc Itttn If
NJ Lawrence Erlbaulll King I
CsiksCIHIll ihali 1 1 Ib rJundt K amp Whakn S ( 1 )94) ]tIIIItc tieillgcn 11( mou of I 1 JifCCC-S Iiiirifllllln Bmrou ( PrlmiddotSS ~
[lidson I L amp I I tJ)Hj)lh roll ofimighr in ilwlIeuual ~ifredncs King l
(dial Child (jlltrtal ]8 is-hi dc Urnl 1 amp lLlll~jl 1 11()()iIlhlmiddot riariollshil hcmlln 1biliriLs and slt1rshy
regllbrld Ic~lrning l ilkncc ti) imcraLTiolb with leIck-mil sdt~lomcpt Ild gender
iglllbiit) lirlI ( 2() 1 ) S
Felder R (19~J 1 kCl our s1Udenrs Dac hrrlLl and Ruhcllo ChtlJiicd KItin
Fdll(iltOi31 10(- j() d Cllb~hcr J l-Llrrallilll C ( 0 (olcn1lt1ll ~1 R (J 9F) UlilIkllgc or boredom Ciftld Ii
tlldIHS ics on rhir ((Pi1 NUiCli 19 132~l(1 iI
Callagher S A (l)lt)H 11 he ((lld 10 ulrinl rhinking I he scheille lilt llleH1in~ht KIo I
ditttTcnriation ii Hill(IiII 8li iL)) 12-20 ic Calb~her S 1 (2()()()1 l rhmiddot to slience expcrtiscmiddot In F Dixon amp S Kronl](I
0100[1 ( l IitI)i u (lllllIO1 [PI 1()~middot+6(J) I1U) TX (n
Irufroc k Prns larson 1
CipsoJ] 1 brdulll 1 0 Ic1111ll L t 19S)1 Rcll(ollhil hC[Cll1 t(lrmal-opltTniullll dlOughr and ttllhclrud ditkulrie in geflLtiS problem IUIilidl ofRlsldJ(f ill --I J gt~
Slilll( ( S 1 1--S2 I Loell (
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
17 DESIGNED TO fiT
ul
IX
Gorodetsky 1 amp Klavir R (2003) What can we learn from how giftedaverage pupils
describe their processes of problem solving) Learning amp Instruction 13 305-326 Grabner R Neubauer A amp Srern E (2006) Superior performance and neural efficiencv
Ihe impact of intelligence and expertise Brain Research Bulletin 69 422-439 Haicr R J JUl1g R E Yeo R A Head K amp Alkire M r (200t) Srrllcrural brain
variHion and general inrelligence Netlroimage J L 425-435 Henderson S (J 995) Vh do I hae ro be here) The Advanced Placement srudelH in
firs(~vear composition Problems and isslles in cognitive development journal ondar) Gifted EduCtlri(Jl 7 )24-532
Hong L (19)9) Swdying the mind of rhe gifted ROfper Relieu 21 244-2)2 Hurst R amp Milkenr 11 (1996) Facilitaring successful prediccion problem gt(living in
biology through application ofskill theor jOllnJal ill Scimce ) 541-)52
Inhclder fl amp Piager j (19)8) the cililrflIor1I IlrO-fi((
Jew York Basic fI()oks
Jarvin L amp Subomik R (2006) Understanding elitc taient ill acadcmil domaim A
dcvclopmcl1(al ttajccwn from hasic ahilities O scholarlv producrivitvcmisfr In E A Dixon amp S 1 Moon (Eek) thc hillidbook (pp205-220) vhco TX Prufrock Press
Kancsky L (1)92) Gifred children and thc learning process Imights on both tlom rhe
rcsearch III E Miinks amp Xi Peters (Eds) J(tlmr r1( (pp 1))middot161) Asscn
Ihe 0lctherlands Van CorClUll
Kanevsky L amp KeighlcvL (2003) 1~) produce or nor ro produce understanding hOi dum and the honor in umkrlchkl111cnr RCIitll26 2()2R
Kauflll]n J C Gentile C r amp Bllf J (200)) Do gifted sflllknr writers and crec)(ive
writing experts raIL lTlcni in till same Child QlltlltCrl 4) 2()O-265 King P v1 amp Kitchener K S (1)94) jll(zr1II IllI
flild illtcllltfli ill flrocsCm fllld (lIn San
Francisco Josse~ Bass
King l 1 amp Kitchencr K S (2004) Iefieltivc judgllllm Ihcorv and research on thl
dtveioplllelH ()f pircmic assllmptions through adulrhood Fdilolfiolltll
YJ(I) )-lR
Kitchener K S (1 )HI) Cogllition Il1ctalugnirioll and episttmic cognition A rhrcltlevel
model of cognitivc pnllc fl1I11II11I )11 dOjJ 1IItl1 I 6 222~252 Klein J T (I ))3) Blurring CLIcking mel crossing Permcation and thc fracturing of
discipline In E lesscr-DlidO D R ShUlllV amp D J Shan (Eds) (Pl 1 Hi-21 I) Charlnwsdle Uniersin
of Virginia Press
Kloss R J (19)4) nudge is hest Helping srudems throllgh rhe Iern schellll of intll
Iccruat Jeel0pllhnr I] I i 1-1 lH
Kronholm M 1 (19J) l Ihe i mp)ct of dCIdnpmenral instruction on rcHen ill iudgmellL
RCIieU ofHigber ErlIldtillll I i 1))-middot2)) Larson R V amp Richmk 1 11 1 L)J 1 ugusr) Boredom in (hi middle scilll() I
ears Blaming schoolgt erus gtIamitlg mdenrs 1l11encdll jOIiJIiI OjliJI(I[JOII 9)
418-44) Lmell C X amp 0unnen j i 2()()i i Tesling the adulr dCelopme1( I()CI of [lahel
hvpothesis HOI1l0gillCOll hmiddot lln position mllaboldtile learning groups and grcldu
ate student sarisfanion tllrtr 11 IY) 1)0
A Guide to Recommended Practices
L GtgtLlA(HER18
Ludlow B L amp Voodrum D T (1)82) Problem-sohing and aerag~
Icarners on a multiple discrimination task (ild
Matthews D amp lkLwghlin T 1)94) EHects otleHIlr-cclHcln acthitics on
achievement and students preterences in [So hiih 5c11Ol lLtrSes HI(tPWdl
fllld AOo)li -8 28)-286 ivlcDonJkl J (I )Kl) Cogniric dcnlopmenr Jnd the rlUdU or geometric contcllr
Rlslrd ill f(ltbcJlldti f((cilwm 20 -11-)4
vlontlgue 1 (19() 1 J Cihnl and Icnning diabkd gifrcd smdllls lise of knowledge and
usc of mrriHIllHicli and prohlem sohing srrarcgic I I(uuioll oftII
11 Y))-+II
middotluis K (2004) ierson(rl cpisrcmologv and marhcmuics - critical rcic and smhesis
of research RcIlli lifdll(lIli()Ii Retii -1 31--3-- Neher H amp Scholllnllr-middotikim 1 (20021 Sclf-regubted ilIKC with hiohl
gitted students l11e rok of cogn it i l l110t i UiOll] L pist cillologicd md cm [ron l1](llshy
[11 (1liahle linif Stili lin 3( I i iC)_-I
Nelson C E (I )8)) Skcwered on th unicorns horn 111lt iluion or the rr(lckotf between content and LTitk1 thinking in the lcaching otsliLllcC [n L X row (Edi
(nth II iii hI j(ltIlaquo rpp 17_-) (lshingrotl DC ]11[onll
Scimee (ltrehers AsOl iou ion
Nelson c E (1 )9() Studellt dicrsir rCl]uircs ditknm appro(lLhcs to collqc tcaciling
Cln in math llld sckncc iIIlT(dl Fiehtllltl(ri S((illhl -10 1(1)-1)
Niaz L amp Robinson Xi (1 j)2) IW1l algllrithmic mode [(l Ol1ccprur1 gCs[1lt in
1Il1lkrstanding rill blhavior of gibe An cpiSlclllOiogic11 pcrspccric Rt(Igt ii)(fshy
IIII 0 ic(bliologiCd hhl(iltiOi J(J )5-(H
Ilttry V ( II (I JeD) hJlII ojilferlld tllirl erb(lt r(ICOPJltJ iii tilt ieiln J Idllltll NeW York Holt Rinehart amp iINon
Plucker J A amp kInrire J (1 l9()) lldel11il sllnilbilin ill high-pOIClHill middle school StlldllltS Cifra (hlld I() --1middot1
Rahinmviu 0 CIar R (llJH)) Cq rulturc Ilnd proces in high U)11Pl lent plrr()rmOlllcmiddot In I D Horcmill 0 1 OBrkn ([k) 111 1111r1Ii1fmte4
11 perpeelIlc (PI -)-)8) ahjn~[oil DC rmCIIlCn ycltologkJI
-soc ia[i 0 n
RohimoJl amp Clinkcnbeard l R (1 ))8) Clftcdncss An cxccprlonaiirv examined
AIIlliltl1 RIIicll j) 11- 151
Ruh1I1 L amp RcI S ((()() Pancrn ohdi~rcglliatiotl jl(men of strHcS
lISC 11llOllg I[)v-Khiing mel high-lchicing univnsin sludlHs ROi lt11leu 8 14K-I
Rv(m 1 (I )k+) loniwring [Xl (ol1lprci1lnsion Inciiidud dirkrcllns in
ul gttandards JOIIiIId
SaL U (2004) A npls ()fhiftd adobccnrsoilld
Schummll 1 (I ))l 11 lOllccprualilllriol1 O(CpiSlcllloiogical hdicl~ and thcir
role 011 kamint In R (lrtlCr ( i A Alexander (Lds) dOllIiX( lid ilitJlC
(iOIl Itit tCXI 2i--fOI liillbJc 1 LlTClllC Erlblllll1
Scitorn1l1er 1 amp DUIlIlLil l 1Jrl Epistcmologicti bdd~ or littcd high chuol
studcllls RalIi 19 1-middot1 )(
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
SChOlllll1(
enul
J7I Shieci
d ir )l)-
Shore II
chilei JlIT
Shore H
dllf
i( ) Sowell
1()
i
Span I
Stcinc I
a rmiddot fl]
SrlillC1 i
In Srcrnh~l
L f Slnnh_
(
Suhotl1~
fhollLh
ch
11lt 111 __
~ ~ tcshy
ri
choo
DESICNED FiT
Schommer-AikinsL Duell 0 K amp Hurter R (2005) Epistemological mathshy
emarical probkm-solving beliefs and academic of middle school students
Ihe 105289-304 Shieer S amp ]1aker C J 199-) Enrichment and acceleration An meniew 1I1d new
directions In ~ Colangelo amp C Davis Haildboo edllcation 99-110) Boston Allm amp Bacon
Shore B M (2000) ktacognitiol1 and Hexibilitmiddot differences in how gifted
children think In R C Friedman amp B 1 Shore (Elk) rllllts ulljf)dillg CogshylIitioli and dlleopllllt 16--1Sn vrashil1gton DC American PsChological
Association
Shore B 1 amp Irving J (200j) Inquirv as a Il(dagogicallink hetween expnie lnc
giftedness111e lbili( lI1d inquin resc1ch group at 1cCili Lnhmiddotcrir
fwd tofld IlIteliirUllilidl O( 1)5-40
Shore B fL amp Lazar 1 (1996) differences in time alltlcatiol1 Irhlc-m
-8 11411-S49
Sowell L R 1cters()ll B S lhol11pon P 1 e1cuIllLmiddot S [ Il~nklt nill L amp lc)gl A V (2003l bpping cortical Cross rhe human lit~ pan MUIII
iVmoicillIr( () 309-51 i
Span )1 amp Oertool11-COrSIll iL R (19H6) Informatioll ng hmiddot intellectual
pupils sullillg Illarhcmuical prohlems Frill(tlliolldl Stil 1 Alarfeillrltio -
273-291 SteineL H H amp Carr 1 12(05) C
more preci undersundinf of Hrclgr RIIiCli 15 21)-21
denmiddotlopl11lnt in children Toward
di fferenccs ill i mel Iigencl Ldi(tltlOlIr
Stcimmiddotr H H amp Clrr 1 (200() 1 r(ldolIIl11t oproJIeil -ollilI Iii gijicrl lllirl Ilmgl~iiil) (fidllll lc(rr(J liml d(fo(illiilt to edliCtiolliI
I-bllppauge lY Ioa Science
Srnnbcrg R J (Ed) (191-12) flIIrll)(o ahliililll illllllgolec ~e York Cambridge
Unlnsir Press
StLrnberg RI (2()()~ L hroJd ie or il1telligencefllc thl(l~ of sllcccssful
COllilltilig lotrildmiddot Jritti(1 illlt R(tllc 55 15)-1 i-l
Sllbotnik R F (2()(Ul doicC1[ pathway to lmll1LIllC ill seicnlL Lcsom irom the
music COIlSLratoIY III P CLTmch- amp L ledcrlllltln (hisl SUOi([ (rII(lItioll [tllII
rnmitllloi( i1Hd pllblli 2)i-502) Burke lOS Pre
lhonl1sI- (200S) RCiing and
ethnicity Il()n~ gifted high SdlOUI sllIdcJl(
Wluing 1 (1989) Logical IllCe-sln to mlkc line graphs j(llnldl itl middotcima J( 3-1-3 -q
Veins[Ock 1 )culllan Y amp iaiuk 1 2()) I) liing thc point or [hL nomh
of wdcllts to icklltit Ltliaiouo argumiddot I11cnts )( 1) -94
Wilkinson V K amp 1)lt)1 i Ih influencc of collegc stmle-nt
logical Ull clecrlLi to h- i 11 ~ prO(SL~ ([Ier rcb iN UJ~Ji()
Vilkinsoll X K amp Sdmart l II I 9fCllhc oricllLltioll I gittLd
adolcsccnrs 11 tL (d 11[ model Reports hJ r6-l)-k
Young E (2001 hyJun(i rlh l)uildillg blocks ()tlir~ fJ COlriu j(gt--+H
A Guide to Recommended Practices
19
GALLAGHER20
Yurgelun-1()dd D A amp Kilgore X D (2006) harmiddotmiddotre8ted acridt in the prefrontal
cortex increases with age during adolescence A preliminary f1RI study Neuroscience Lmer406194-19()
Zhang L F (J 999) Furrher cross-cultural validation of rill theory of menul self-governshymenr journal 133 16)-1)1
Zhang L F amp atkins D (200 II Cognitivc dcvcloplllll1t llld stUdcnt approaches to
learning An investigation ofPerns theor~ vith Clullcse and US uniersitv students Higher EduCfltiol1 41239-2(1
SUSANr
We
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
6 GALLACHeR
develop is significant because more leads to different (Berliner 1986 as cited
in Shiever amp Maker 199~) Vith more content at their disposal gifted students
can make more connections and see more original relationships fen a strong
knowledge base facilitates and is facilitated by the development of advanced
domain-specific strategies and metacognitive knovvlcdge (Carr amp Alexander 1996 p 214) Over time these strategies accumulate and create an im perus toward
complex and abstract leH1s of understanding
Abstract Complex Content
Another form of diHerentiation panicularlv appropriate f(Jr gifted students
is exposure to abstracr cOIlClprual ideas Abstract reasoning creates its OWIl rc)rm of new content ro understand encompassing inrll1gible notions such as hypothshy
esis posing theorizing and analogous reasoning Bv implication srudents must
hlYe acces to abstract reasoning before they can succeed with curriculum that
rlquires designing experiments inrerpreting symbolic meaning or comparing
polic~ initiatives
Students are generally thought to have ~lCces to abstract thought with the onset
of adolescence and the acquisition of fiJrmal operational reasoning (Inhdder amp Piaget 1958) Svsttmatic differences between groups in the acquisition of formal
operational reasoning would provide compelling reawns (0 diff(rentiate in order to
capitalize on the early opportullity to begin honing these essential skill Berninger
and YHes (1995) present a thorough review of the literature on gifted students and
[(Hillal operations demollstrating that
1 Children move through the Pbgetian stages in the SHlll order but not on
the same timcline Cifted students acquire lHll1al operational reasoning
around ages 12-- 11 1110t other students arc still in the transition to f(Hl11al
operations It age 1 i 2 Cifted boys tend to enttr formal operations earlier than gifted girls ~nle
etfect size of this ditt(ren(e is smail and the male advantage dil11inishts
by bte adolescence
3 Cifted adolescents progress through substages of formal operations more
quickly than their age-mates
Cifted students have the Cclpacin f()r abstracr conceptual reasoning as many
as ) years ahead of their peers-thc equillIlent their emire illedle school (areers
Naturallr variability exists in both the gifted and average populations but still the
implications arc clear (itrcd srudents are readv to grapple with qualitatively dif
fercn t con ten t years ahead of thci l cLlssnu tes ()nce formal oper~ltions arc achieved
instruction should be dl~igncd ((lard mastering this new [(lrm of content as it
is critical for Sllccess in econdar ltCademics (Bitner Il)) I Cipson Abraham amp
Renner 1989 Hurst amp MilkCnt 19 ~latthevs amp McLaughlin 1994 McDonald
1 ()89 iaz amp Robinson 19()2 Xnwing 1989) Incorporating conceptual content
with a plentiful ElCtual base also prmides a means ofensuring that learning will not
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
7
r
i shy
[
J
[
DESIGNED TO FIT
fall into drill and rote memorization Concepts help organize facts resulting in more meaningful connections and expert-like thinking (Shore amp Irving 2005)
Disciplinary or Interdisciplinary Content
Understanding the need for a deep concept-centered knowledge base is only pardy useful it also is necessar~ to know how to focus the knowledge Compelling
arguments can be made in two directions On one hand opportunity for early
specialization is essential tor students with exemplary talent (jarvin amp Subotnik
2006) Early specialization also makes sense for many students whose chosen career
may require many years ofschooling On the other hand the modern age is marked by unique combinations of traditional disciplines into new fields (Klein 19(3) and innovation is often the resulr of cross-disciplinary application similar to the use of linguistics to decode the DNA sequence (Young 20tH) Ultimately tilL
most effective programs for gifted adolescents provide the choice ro eithergt) wide
or deep whil~ ensuring some exposure ro deep disciplinary thinking and original
interdisciplinary connections regardless of the direction students take In sum gifted students arc capable of learning substantially more content
than their peers They also have earlv capacity for abstract thought which both
adds a of contenr and helps organize bcmal inr(lrmation Building a gifted students knowledge baslt maklts sense especially because this knowledge base is a
predictor of academic sliccess Ensuring that gifted students fond as they are of novel tv remain engaged in learning requires the presentation of content that
bull presents information using instructional models that Elcilitate idenrificashy
tion and creation of meaningful connections
bull allmvs for inductive and deductivlt connections between facts and absrract ideas
bull incorporates time specifically f()1 cultivation of abstract reasoning and bull encourages either deep exploration of one diScipline (with exposure to
inrerdisciplinary thought) or wide exploration of several disciplines (with
exposure to deep exploration in one field)~or both
Frequent Opportunities for Higher Order Thinking
Ihe knowledge base gifted students acquire may he impressie but it is ultishy
mnely fairly useless unless rhev pur that knowledge ro work with the help thinking strategies SurprisinglY (he research base on gifted adolecents unique
chinking arrribnrcs is thin in both gifted education and cognitive science research
on how cognitive difhrenccs dCIclop is virtuallv nonexistent (Steiner amp Carr 2003)
The research that is available tltnds to tocus on three interrelated areas ( JI strategic thinking metacognitioI1 and (5) cxpen thinking
Thinking to Slow Down Gifted students generallv use the same set of srratltgies that other students use so in terms of sheer number of
A Guide to Recommended Practices
8 CALLAGHER
strategies employed they do not seem difFerent from other students (Hong 1999)
However gifted students learn more quickly and when r~lCcd with a challenging
task they use more complex ftlfmS of strategies and often seleer sophisticated
strategies lSteiner amp Carr 2006) Having more contenr at their disposal they have
the capacity to use thinking strategies to more original ends As obvious as it may
seem however it bears emphasizing that there is a difFerence berween knowing a
strategy and using a strategy Evidence suggests that gifted studenrs only use their
critical thinking srrategies when they perceive a need that is when the challenge
of a task merits their use (Hong 199))
Gifted students advantage with thinking strategies is especiallv apparent when
they are engaged in prohlem solving Cdred srudenrs tend to show a greater explicit
knowledge of problcm-sohing stages know more problem-solving strategies and
are more adepr in selecting strategies to usc when t~1Ced h an open-ended problem
111ey also are more inclined to switch from one strategy to another when necesshy
sary (Kanevskv 1 ()92) [he sucngrh gitred studenrs demonstrate is evident even
in the absence of direct instruction in problem solving gifted stLIdenrs seem to
invent strltegies when needed (lonrague 1991) Xhile they 1re problem solving
t1st-learning gifted studenrs slow down taking more time to plan and strategize
(Davidson amp Sternberg 1 ()84 Shore amp Lazar 1996) [n addition they show early
tendencies toward expert-like behavior when prohlem solving content knowledge
may strengthen this tendencv (Cherne Jinter amp Cherney 20()))
In sunllnary gitred smdcl1[s dCl11onsrrlfe superior performance in a wide range
of thinking skills which they use well and selectivelv However gifted stlldellts
use these skills onh when faced with meaningful challenges Ensuring that gifted
srudenrs develop their skills in critical thinking requires
bull consranr exposure to challenging conrent
bull tasks more challenging than aYcrage requiring the use of critical
thinking
bull reflective time to engage III problem finding planning and cOllcepmai
reasoning and
bull an oer111 p1(e curriculum 1Ild instruction in which time saved a a result
of ra~lid COlHenr learning is spellt on more difficult complex thinking
Afelflcog1lii(JIl In the cark 1))-10 Sternberg (I (JH2 propoed that l11ctacognishy
tion the ability to Oversee and manage thinking is an important flCwr in gifted
pertl)rmlt1nceAfter two decades of research a more specitlc hut unexpected picshy
mre has emerged ofgittcd studel[~ llse of l11ctacognitiol1 AltilOugh it is dear that
mcr1cognirion is a component or cXLmpL1r pertl)rmaI1Ce gifted students do nO[
show a clcar-cut pcrtlJrmance adYll1tagl In tlcr there lfC on two areas of metashy
cognition where gitred studclHS COlbistlIlrV show superior performance (1) gifted
student knowledge 1hollt speLdic iemling strategics and i) their indination to
usc a skill in a ncw usual gteIting Iso known IS far rrlmt~I (Carr amp Alexanmiddot
der 1996 Robinson 0 ClinhmiddotnbLlld 19()x Span amp Cherroom-Corsmit 1986)
Other s[udie of l11l[~K()gl1itiun hem onk a slight adYltllHlge gitred studenrs
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
son
iu
pn till
(tr
11 [
the
S( 1
th
d~ tic
() le1
tiH
flU
dmiddot l
Lu
Inl I
1lt1 li
j ri
bull
pot
hlll I
SlrLI
Pl Sh )
DtSIGNED TO FIT 9
~-~I~Jl~
-itd
~~l
lLmiddot [
- 1HJ
tlcd
ci[lmiddotd
ci picshy
cr tilar
I()11 to
~ cxanshy l)-())
lt lLLms
some show inferior performance among gifted youth (Dresel amp Haugwitz 2005
Ludlow amp Woodrum 1982) At first glance these findings seem counrerintuitive Why wouldnt gifted stushy
dents show the same advantage in metacognition that they have in learning content
and using thinking skills Carr and Alexander (1996) presenred three plausible
explanations First the tasks llsed in metacognitive research especially research on
near transfer may be so easy that gifted srudenrs do well without monitoring their
performance 111is would explain vhy gifted students are similar to their peers in
their use of metacognitive skills on near transfer tasks but consistently perform betshy
ter on far transfer tasks Far transfer tasks offer a greater challenge requiring gifted
smdems to engage in sdf-monitoring Drescl and Haugwitz (200)) conducted a
classroom-based study that reintorces this notion finding that gifted students did
nO[ use self-regulating behavior if thev thought an assignment was easy Based on
their study they concluded the finding that students with high abilities use
strategies less frequentlv in regular school lessons can be seen as an indication that
their learning environment is inadequately low (p I )) In order ro provide
gifced students with the same amount of practice in self-regulation as average stushy
dems they must work as frequently with tasks the find challenging-I11e alternashy
tive is to leave these skills undeveloped underdeveloped or poorly ckvcloped
Second the relationship between metacognition and IQ lllay have a threshshy
old dlCct lQ may predict skilled LIse of metacognition up to a point Once the
threshold is crossed I(~ docs not guarantee that children will acquire or usc
cognitive skills such as Illcracognitioll believed to promote high achievement
1l1ese cognitie kills appear to deeop instead our ofel11crging expertise (Carr
amp Alexander 19W) p 214) 111 iId the generic conrent-free nature of research tasks may be both u nrcal istic
and unlikelv to [eltal gifted performance difFerences Research Oil expert perforshy
mance suggests that cognitivc monitoring realh is on necessary after thc student
develops I deep and signif1cam body of discipline-based coment (Chi Glaser amp Em 19RR Rabinowitz amp Glaser 19Wi)
In SLIm gifted students have accts) to seWregulatory lwhaviors but lise them
inconsistenrh- Llltctive self-regulation is relatcd both to ltlcademic success and to
adlllt expert percml) 111 cO Ensuring that gifted students have adequate practice
wirh a wide range of metltlcognitivc skills requires
bull constanr exposure ro chaltnging Cllmcnr
bull learn j ng tasks slIfficicn tk d iftlcul r to requi re sOl f-regulation 1l1el bull immersion in disciplinan-hased CO I1(C 11(
EjJfrtis( and 1migh r i nw expert performance prmides ] guideshy
post trll planning programs ttlr gifred adolescenrs because we aspire for Ihll11 ro become experts or innomiddotlt1wrs in their chosen field Research filldings conrinul ro
strengthen the rit between gifrlmiddotd srudenrs thought processes and rhar of domainshy
specitlc expertS (Gorodetsb 0 -hlir 2003 Klll till an Genrile amp Bacr 200) Shore 2(00) Common charlc-rnirics ~llreadv discllssed include rapid acquisirion
A Guide to Recommended Practices
GALLAGHER10
of content skill and flexibility in critical thinking and self-regulation Gifted srudenrs seem to intuitively have some expert-like skills (Kaufman er ai 2005) while others are only acquired through training (Cherney et ai 2005)
Reviewing the literature on expertise Carr and Alexander (1996) pointed our
that it more than skill and ability to be an expert Although experts need sufficient general ability (IQ) to perf()fm at a high level other such as task
commitmenr a sttOng knowledge and social suppOrt are more important tor developing expertise and promoting achievement through expertise (p 214) Ihe list of teguiremenrs for expertise also includes perspective forward problem solving persistence risk taking and tacit knowledge professional language and behaviors Jarvin amp Sllbornik 2006 Shore 2000 Sternberg 2(03) Expershy
tise in this larger sense can be devcoped using curriculum and instruction
emphasize problem solving open-ended questions construction ofideas multiple
perspectives and exposure to disciplinary experts (Gallagher 2006 Shore amp Irving
2005 Sternberg 2003 Sllbornik 2003) [11 sum gifted students cognitivl characteristics parallel those of adult lxperts
Ensuring thar gifted srudlnts continue to develop lxperr-like skills requires
bull exposure to explicit and tacit dbciplinary knowledge bull time to engage in flexibll thinking with disciplinary and interdisciplinary
content
bull curriculum and instruction thar incorporate inquiry cOl1ceptuallearning and authentic conrexts and
bull opportunities f(lI problem solving and mentorships
The Role of Student Perspective Epistemology
Still missing is perhaps t11l most importanr rlCror abollt the education ofgifred adole~cellts Etons to design effective programs and promote new kinds of practice will be for naught if thc srudems themselves do not recognize the significance or
valuc in (he tasks assigned [ he t(JrI11 of perspecrivl in question is tpistemgy ones abo lit rhe nature
of knowledge Perry (1 presel1[ed a developmental scheme that made direct
and pragmatic application [0 the classroom tor it described both how students
views of knowledge change Ocr time and also the powerful eteCt ditering views
have in the classroom Perrys scheme presents nine distincr positions that can be collapsed into four broad suges as sUlllmarized by Gallagher (2006)
Dualism Marked by a black-and-white perspective srudents at rhis sragl
believe aillegirimate questions have certain anSWlrs So-called questions without answers are jmt nOl1seme questions pointless
Multiplicity Stlldents acknowledge that there arc a kw unanswered
questions hut hdiCL dur in the absence of an ltlnswer all opinions on the matter are egualk alid
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Student
III
kl(
[h
hu [he ~J
() r
lV ~ rk Illmiddot
I I ~
id
11
kJ
11 DESIGNED TO FIT
middot dti t
1 __1
tl
n~
u~url
- l i rlcl
cLnt~
~ leWS
-1-1 be
lll1
Contextual Relativism Unanswered questions are investigated using the
tools provided by each discipline each discipline approaches questions in a different wav Certain amwers are unlikely bur a best ansver can
be achieved using the proper rools
CommitmentDialectic Theories are used [() set directions for imporshy
cam questions most of which have no right or wrong answers Gaining understanding requires building upon the possibilities presented by dara as interpreted by a consciously selected point ofview bur with willingness
to change perspective if rhe need arises (p 436)
l~lble 1 presents the f(lUr stages aligned with the beliefs about learning that Iecomshy
pany each stage For a more concrete example comider Carl and Cedric two students waitshy
ing for class to begin Carl believes rlwt knowledge means fH-rS and being knowledgeable means remembering lots of bets Cedric 011 the other band
thinks that knowledge is the abilitv to combine bcts to create ideas For Cedric
being knowledgeable isnt aboll[ the numher of ElCts he knows its ahout how the [Kts can form and rd()fIll to create diffltrent ideas Their teacher Ms Morshy
gan starts her lecture on the Trail oflCars f()(using on the sequence of even ts
detailing what who and when Carl picks up his pen and starts studiously takshying notes Cedric slumps down in his desk grumbling [lCtoids-lbe two boys
hear the same lccrure bom the same teacher but their ditterent belids abour
knowledge afftC[ bow willing they are to accept the inf()rmation as meaningful or valid
A numher ofrheories nmv artempt to describe aspects ofepistel11ological develshyopment (Baxter 1agolda 1987 King amp Kitchener 1994 Schommer 1994) Each theory describes sequen tiaL developmentalmovemenr from a low or naive stance in which knowledge is equated with flctllal inr()Jmation and memorization to
a high or mature stance in which bets are used ro build theories from a
consciollsly selected point ofview but with willingness w change perspective if the need arises (C~lllagher 2006 p 43(1) In the example above Carl holds a navc
stallce and thu~ is happy to gather up a list of taCtS from the lecture Cedrics stance
is more mature and he wishes the flcts had been embedded in more meaningful ideas
Je ComprelJemizie Irnptlct (1Fpitemgy At one level the impact of Carls
and Cedrics differing heliefs is immediately apparent Students are not like ro learn what the do 110 helilVl to be Illeaningfu-or at least they wont learn it
t()r long After two decades of reselrch into the effeC( of epistemology on karning
it is clear that the impact extends hevond whether students like whl( thl learn to
a number of other important ilCldll1lic Ol[COll1es dCllciemil ilcJitlJcmcnt Using a structural equation
analysis Cano (2005) f()ulld that high school students epistemological stance had
both direct and indirect effects 011 academic achievement Similar results have been
A Guide to Recommended Practices
Stages of Epistemological
Development(3
co Beliefs 3 Associated With the Positionl shyVgt rI)
1 rI) ~
~ -shy
Instruction That C
Matches~
shyshy Epistemological Vgt ngt Stage 0 l- -lt Instruction That Vgt Encourages c shy Movement to a ~ Higher Stage
Earlier Positions
r 0 ~ ~
T 4~ r r r ~
TABLI 1
Perrys StagesPositions of Epistemological Reasoning and Related Instructional Strategies
-
Dualism Multiplicity Relativism
Knowledge is cer- Some questions have I Knowledge is interpreted tam (right or wrong) no certain answers in and unambiquous these cases knowledge
I in context distinguishing better from worse answers
and truth are subjec- Irequires selecting theories Authorities (teachers) live so everyones opinshy Ih b jt he quPtiouknow The Truth ion is eq~llyvalid
Activities that help Practice in comparshy Practice in creating students develop skill ing hypotheses and
comparing and select-
in memorization and theories acknowledgshy ing preferable theoshyrecall mnemonics etc ing all possibilities retical models
in exoert behaviors
Exposure to lems with more than in different disciplines one right answer andl to conduct research or more than one construct theories approach to a solution and make decisions
RanCJe of Typical School Senior
Range of Gifted High School Senior
~ ~ I g C shy ~ n ~ -5 ~ ~ ~ ~ shy
~- ~ ~r r rshy - shyr r l
~ r- r
2-~ r- shy shy
~
r r
I CommitmentDialectic
Knowledge methods are and uncertain Choices require analysis and values
Later Positions
n Z 0 l ln 0r
~ shy~
N
( raquo shyraquo CI J
0
13 DESIGNED TO FIT
found with middle school srudenrs (Schommer-Aikins Duell amp 11l[ter 2005) Studenrs at lower levels may have trouble correcring misconceptions and draw
only fact-based information from inquiry-oriented environments (Ryan ] 984) Epistemological Jtanee aJectJ ildvanced academic performance Students with
more advanced belief have an easier time building logical arguments (Weinstock
Kellman amp Tabak 2(04) they tend to choose thinking strategies that Slipport
deep rather than surface learning (Cano 2005 Zhang amp Watkins 2(01) Kitchshy
enet (1983) also suggested that students selectioll of meracognirive strategies can
be affected by their epis((mologicai beliefs Support for this idea comes from a study by Ruban and Reis (2006) who found that high-achieving students tended
to select cnhancemem oriented learning strategies while lower achieving srudents
selected survival oriented strategies
Illstruction can encourage )WIemem to higber epistemological elcTelChers
can affecr changes in students epistemological thinking through intentionally
structllred learning experiences (Kloss 1094 Kronholm 1993l Strategies recomshy
mended to dCc1op epistemological thinking include using ill-structured problems
and instructional straregics thar allow srudenrs to examine their assumptions anashy
lyze data that present different conHicting perspectiyes and then make decisions
(King amp Kitchener 20(4) Devoting some time to direct instruction about tbe
narure of the discipline helps develop higher levels of reasoning (Bdl 20(4) vhmltltch bet1 iecn instructiol t7 lid epistemoogiCtl Itllnee (pnspect i IJt) colltributes
to jruurrltiol[ (wd disillusiolllJlflll Cedric didnt respond well when Ms Marrin
started a f1Cr-based lecture Over time he will simply decide that school is trivial
or worse meaningless Had Ms 1artin staned imtead with a discllssion of the
violation of Native Americans sense of personhood Cedric wOllld have been
thrilled and Carl would hae been lost This kind of disparity creates barriers to
learning (Nelson 19()6 PelTY 1(70) --Jebel and Schommer-Aikins (2002) f()lnd
that a mismatch between insrruction and stance caused work avoidance among
some high school phYsics students Lovell and lunnefY (2004) ltJUnd that srudents
even found small-group work Illore Itisfing when they Vere grouped according
to sranct (perspecrhc)
Giftrd tlldCIIpound1 tmel to tlJead iii epistemgical dezclopllllllt Stll(iiLs of adoshylescents doculllent that cpistemological belicts mature in a pndioablc dcvelopshy
mental sequcnce (Cano 200) Zhang amp latk ins 2(01) In parallcl to formal
operational reasoning gifred rdoiesccl1t move through episremologicli stges in
the same sequence (Ihomas 2()08) but tend to be a stage or rwo ahead of orlIer
rhe same age (Arlin amp LCirr Il))X Goldberger 1981 Schollll11er I Dunnell
1997 ~n1Omas) 2008 Wilkinsoll I Iaxwcll 1991 iilkinsoll amp Schw~lrtz 19X-1
Lible 1 provides a general seme of the distribution of senior year studcm baSell on existing research
Adult experts tend to holt IlrlzlIIeal epi)tllIIologimlliClls -Ihc epistcl11ojogicri
framework also provides a UHl1lCtiOIl to anuther aspect of experrisc -CIO the
disciplines the behaviors and l([irlllk associared with mature episrel11ologv arc
A Guide to Recommended Practices
[
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
gt ~ ~--------------
GALLAGHER14
considered essential for advanced authentic work (Buehl amp Alexander 2005 Felder 1997 Henderson 1995 Kloss 1994 Muis 20(4)
Connections With G~fted Education Evidence that gifted students tend ro
be somewhat ahead of their age-mates in epistemological development follows
naturally from the data on formal operations reponed above However other
inreresting connections bring this theon into cohesion with existing knowledge
of giftltd students for example there is some indication that people who prlttCr
Intuition on the Jhers-Briggs Type Inventory tend [() have higher epistemologishy
cal stances (Zhang 199()) Cifted rudents overwhelmingly report this prdlrenCl
(Sak 2004) and the connecrion gives further evidencc that giftcd students will
respond best to open-ended inquiry-oriented learning environments Similarly
it explains gifted adolescents positive response to mentOr relationships Like
all adolescents gifted reenagers want to see similarities bcrween themselves and
others in mentors they find kindred spirits who think abour ideas from similar
frames of mind
Most exciting perhaps is the COil necrion between epistell1oosY md expertise
Not only do gifted students show earlv potential to achieve the expens high levels
of reasoning bur also epistell1ologicalll10deis provide a guide to he p explain how [() move all students closer to authentic higher order reasoning Callagher (l99X) suggested that models slIch as these would make effecdve frameworks for designing
high school curriculum providing an organic model for differentiation Based on
his study of adolescent epistelllological beliefs Cano (200raquo) concurred
it is necessary to take into account nor only students previous knowlshy
edge and learning strategies bur also their learning approaches and
epistemological beliefs Secondlv wc should work directly to try to
enhance [he depth of learning approaches and the complexity of episshy
temological belid~ as way of improving academic achievemenc (p 217)
Finally this framework reinforces the notion that the outcomes tt)r ignorshy
ing srudents beliefs are grave Srudents have trouble accepting the relevance of
instrtlLtion that is out of sync with their stag (Perr- ]970) a finding that is
consonant with the well-established knowledge that gifred adolescents reject munshy
dane repetitive curriculum hlrrher gifted students operating at higher levels than
other students find instrllction orienred towards the majorit uninspiring and
communicate their feelings through underachievement More sltriollsly perhaps
Nelson (1989) cautioned that excessive time spent in low-lenl curriculum actively
builds a wall of habit that blocks the path to higher level reasoning Even rapid
acceleration can havc this d~magillg eftect ifstudenrs are onlv accelerated into nev
low-level content It) prmidl a climl[e read for higher order thinking educators
must present COIltCIH that is accelerated vertically as well as horizomalh-
CI [
tCl ~I
1
lhe IS 110 i I
and fUc
hest n~II
15
bull - r
~ shy
~
~n( )1shy
()f ut I
l1UI1shy
[hm
inti
lpid
DLltiCNEl) TO m
Complete Coherence Evidence-Based Recommendations for
Differentiation in Secondary School
Each of the perspecrivcs considercc1 in this rationale is championed h differshy
ent researchers operating from different paradigms and using differenr research
techniques Even so their respectin findings arc remarkably similar
1 Gifted adolescents nced exposure [0 ~l larger quanrity of coment that
the find dnllenging Beginning at least in middle schooL abstract conshy
tenr should he a srandard part of their curriculum I he importlnle of developing a plenriful high-quality wcll of information i essLlHial as
it is a precursor to using higher order thinking ll1etJcognitivc thinking
and abstract thinking Cifted students will lot adequJtek develop their
thinking skills without this knowledge base 2 A quality knowledge bZlse is neCssary hilt notutticilmiddotllt ItH developing
thinking skilk Ciftecl studenrs 1lUt be presented with Ierning experishy
ences that require them to engage their critical thinking skills and metlshy
cognitive skills If they do not find their assignments challenging their
brains willilot engage their higher order functions T()gether content and
strategv med along ith metacognition predict academic perf()[mltlnce
making the simultalleous devdopmenr of these three paramount
3 Cifted students show earl~ promise t()r deydoping expertise Capitalizi ng
on that earlv promise requires instruction where stlldems Gl1 practice the
qualities of expcrtbe including open-ended imtruction inquiry-based
instruction problcm-oriented instrucrion field experiences and menrorshy
ships all cCl1[ercd 011 high-qualitv disciplinarv or imcrdisciplinary content
Cifted srudents arc most lihk to sec this instruction as relevant and draw
maximum value hom it
4 Expertisc requircs more thall contLflt and skill habits of mind ~llld
~llhaI1C1d epistemological re~lsoning also arc essentiaL If we aspirc for gifted students-~or for allY s(Udel1l~--to hecome creative productive leadshy
ers in their chosen field curriculutH ~lJld instruction should he selected to
develop these simultaneoush- and include exposure to the philosophies
and (thics of thc disciplines
The absence of a qualin- differerlliated secondary progrll11 flH gifted students
is not a neutral position it is 1 choice that will result in deficit skill dCeopmcnt
and student apathy At worr it ill result in the disillusionment some of the
best minds in the country
A Guide to Recommended Practices
i
GALLAGHER16
References
Arlin P K amp Levin L (1998) A deelopmenta perspc((ic on giftedness
HeetlrcIoltnlld I )4~~5i(1 Baxter Jvlagolda Jvl B (J 987) Comparing open-ended inteljcs lnd standardized mea- Hair
sun of inrelieefUal development ollilla Strfmt PCIJoiJle 28 443~44S -i
BdL E (2004) Promoring StUdUHS argumenr consrrncriOll and collahorativc debate in thc Hell science classfl)om rn ~ 1 C Linn E A Davis amp P Bell (Eds J Imimlt J1lrOltrrIOtS h~middot
seimC IIiCilioll (pp 11 i-145) lal11ah 1 Lawrence Erlballl11
rkrningcr V amp Yates C (J (95) Formal operational thought in rhe gifted A postshy H(ln~
Piagetian pnspecriC Hu(ti (nilli I) 220~224 HUN
Rirnn B L (l991 Formal operHional nlsolling Illodes Predictors of critical thinking
abilit ies alld grade assigned Iw reacher in sciencc and nlarhemltltics il[ student in
grades nine rhrough [tke Ollljli ill Sciei( 28 2()-2~4 InhclcL
Buehl 1 amp Alnlnder P (2001) lorivarion and pnr~HlllaJl(e ditferemes in srudelJ[
dOllllin-specific epiSrllllUI()~illt11 bel iet profiles ilIHlIll FdllClitiolfll NCilllrchOII1i
middoti2 (N-- - 2(
ClIlO I (200i) Lpistcl]ologicai bclid~ IJlld a[lproaches to Icllning Ih~ir through lh secol1dan chool wd their influcncc Oil lCademic pn~lrn1alKe Bllti_f lotmil
tdlildtiOllit -) 205- 221 Kanl
ClIl 1 amp Alexander I (I )()6) Xhere giftd children do 1Ild do nO[ cxcel on llleracogshy
n irin lasb Noel) NcriCiI 18 12lt 1( 1)
Cherne L 11 VinrCl J amp Chlrnc j1 l (200i) NucleH problem s()h-ln~ Kanl
elise stUlh of expert-I1Oicl differences hllliSlletoll fI(the iVdmtI of
Seillle w 1-- hi 11 T H (lascL R amp iarr 1 J (itk) (19HHl Ihc Itttn If
NJ Lawrence Erlbaulll King I
CsiksCIHIll ihali 1 1 Ib rJundt K amp Whakn S ( 1 )94) ]tIIIItc tieillgcn 11( mou of I 1 JifCCC-S Iiiirifllllln Bmrou ( PrlmiddotSS ~
[lidson I L amp I I tJ)Hj)lh roll ofimighr in ilwlIeuual ~ifredncs King l
(dial Child (jlltrtal ]8 is-hi dc Urnl 1 amp lLlll~jl 1 11()()iIlhlmiddot riariollshil hcmlln 1biliriLs and slt1rshy
regllbrld Ic~lrning l ilkncc ti) imcraLTiolb with leIck-mil sdt~lomcpt Ild gender
iglllbiit) lirlI ( 2() 1 ) S
Felder R (19~J 1 kCl our s1Udenrs Dac hrrlLl and Ruhcllo ChtlJiicd KItin
Fdll(iltOi31 10(- j() d Cllb~hcr J l-Llrrallilll C ( 0 (olcn1lt1ll ~1 R (J 9F) UlilIkllgc or boredom Ciftld Ii
tlldIHS ics on rhir ((Pi1 NUiCli 19 132~l(1 iI
Callagher S A (l)lt)H 11 he ((lld 10 ulrinl rhinking I he scheille lilt llleH1in~ht KIo I
ditttTcnriation ii Hill(IiII 8li iL)) 12-20 ic Calb~her S 1 (2()()()1 l rhmiddot to slience expcrtiscmiddot In F Dixon amp S Kronl](I
0100[1 ( l IitI)i u (lllllIO1 [PI 1()~middot+6(J) I1U) TX (n
Irufroc k Prns larson 1
CipsoJ] 1 brdulll 1 0 Ic1111ll L t 19S)1 Rcll(ollhil hC[Cll1 t(lrmal-opltTniullll dlOughr and ttllhclrud ditkulrie in geflLtiS problem IUIilidl ofRlsldJ(f ill --I J gt~
Slilll( ( S 1 1--S2 I Loell (
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
17 DESIGNED TO fiT
ul
IX
Gorodetsky 1 amp Klavir R (2003) What can we learn from how giftedaverage pupils
describe their processes of problem solving) Learning amp Instruction 13 305-326 Grabner R Neubauer A amp Srern E (2006) Superior performance and neural efficiencv
Ihe impact of intelligence and expertise Brain Research Bulletin 69 422-439 Haicr R J JUl1g R E Yeo R A Head K amp Alkire M r (200t) Srrllcrural brain
variHion and general inrelligence Netlroimage J L 425-435 Henderson S (J 995) Vh do I hae ro be here) The Advanced Placement srudelH in
firs(~vear composition Problems and isslles in cognitive development journal ondar) Gifted EduCtlri(Jl 7 )24-532
Hong L (19)9) Swdying the mind of rhe gifted ROfper Relieu 21 244-2)2 Hurst R amp Milkenr 11 (1996) Facilitaring successful prediccion problem gt(living in
biology through application ofskill theor jOllnJal ill Scimce ) 541-)52
Inhclder fl amp Piager j (19)8) the cililrflIor1I IlrO-fi((
Jew York Basic fI()oks
Jarvin L amp Subomik R (2006) Understanding elitc taient ill acadcmil domaim A
dcvclopmcl1(al ttajccwn from hasic ahilities O scholarlv producrivitvcmisfr In E A Dixon amp S 1 Moon (Eek) thc hillidbook (pp205-220) vhco TX Prufrock Press
Kancsky L (1)92) Gifred children and thc learning process Imights on both tlom rhe
rcsearch III E Miinks amp Xi Peters (Eds) J(tlmr r1( (pp 1))middot161) Asscn
Ihe 0lctherlands Van CorClUll
Kanevsky L amp KeighlcvL (2003) 1~) produce or nor ro produce understanding hOi dum and the honor in umkrlchkl111cnr RCIitll26 2()2R
Kauflll]n J C Gentile C r amp Bllf J (200)) Do gifted sflllknr writers and crec)(ive
writing experts raIL lTlcni in till same Child QlltlltCrl 4) 2()O-265 King P v1 amp Kitchener K S (1)94) jll(zr1II IllI
flild illtcllltfli ill flrocsCm fllld (lIn San
Francisco Josse~ Bass
King l 1 amp Kitchencr K S (2004) Iefieltivc judgllllm Ihcorv and research on thl
dtveioplllelH ()f pircmic assllmptions through adulrhood Fdilolfiolltll
YJ(I) )-lR
Kitchener K S (1 )HI) Cogllition Il1ctalugnirioll and episttmic cognition A rhrcltlevel
model of cognitivc pnllc fl1I11II11I )11 dOjJ 1IItl1 I 6 222~252 Klein J T (I ))3) Blurring CLIcking mel crossing Permcation and thc fracturing of
discipline In E lesscr-DlidO D R ShUlllV amp D J Shan (Eds) (Pl 1 Hi-21 I) Charlnwsdle Uniersin
of Virginia Press
Kloss R J (19)4) nudge is hest Helping srudems throllgh rhe Iern schellll of intll
Iccruat Jeel0pllhnr I] I i 1-1 lH
Kronholm M 1 (19J) l Ihe i mp)ct of dCIdnpmenral instruction on rcHen ill iudgmellL
RCIieU ofHigber ErlIldtillll I i 1))-middot2)) Larson R V amp Richmk 1 11 1 L)J 1 ugusr) Boredom in (hi middle scilll() I
ears Blaming schoolgt erus gtIamitlg mdenrs 1l11encdll jOIiJIiI OjliJI(I[JOII 9)
418-44) Lmell C X amp 0unnen j i 2()()i i Tesling the adulr dCelopme1( I()CI of [lahel
hvpothesis HOI1l0gillCOll hmiddot lln position mllaboldtile learning groups and grcldu
ate student sarisfanion tllrtr 11 IY) 1)0
A Guide to Recommended Practices
L GtgtLlA(HER18
Ludlow B L amp Voodrum D T (1)82) Problem-sohing and aerag~
Icarners on a multiple discrimination task (ild
Matthews D amp lkLwghlin T 1)94) EHects otleHIlr-cclHcln acthitics on
achievement and students preterences in [So hiih 5c11Ol lLtrSes HI(tPWdl
fllld AOo)li -8 28)-286 ivlcDonJkl J (I )Kl) Cogniric dcnlopmenr Jnd the rlUdU or geometric contcllr
Rlslrd ill f(ltbcJlldti f((cilwm 20 -11-)4
vlontlgue 1 (19() 1 J Cihnl and Icnning diabkd gifrcd smdllls lise of knowledge and
usc of mrriHIllHicli and prohlem sohing srrarcgic I I(uuioll oftII
11 Y))-+II
middotluis K (2004) ierson(rl cpisrcmologv and marhcmuics - critical rcic and smhesis
of research RcIlli lifdll(lIli()Ii Retii -1 31--3-- Neher H amp Scholllnllr-middotikim 1 (20021 Sclf-regubted ilIKC with hiohl
gitted students l11e rok of cogn it i l l110t i UiOll] L pist cillologicd md cm [ron l1](llshy
[11 (1liahle linif Stili lin 3( I i iC)_-I
Nelson C E (I )8)) Skcwered on th unicorns horn 111lt iluion or the rr(lckotf between content and LTitk1 thinking in the lcaching otsliLllcC [n L X row (Edi
(nth II iii hI j(ltIlaquo rpp 17_-) (lshingrotl DC ]11[onll
Scimee (ltrehers AsOl iou ion
Nelson c E (1 )9() Studellt dicrsir rCl]uircs ditknm appro(lLhcs to collqc tcaciling
Cln in math llld sckncc iIIlT(dl Fiehtllltl(ri S((illhl -10 1(1)-1)
Niaz L amp Robinson Xi (1 j)2) IW1l algllrithmic mode [(l Ol1ccprur1 gCs[1lt in
1Il1lkrstanding rill blhavior of gibe An cpiSlclllOiogic11 pcrspccric Rt(Igt ii)(fshy
IIII 0 ic(bliologiCd hhl(iltiOi J(J )5-(H
Ilttry V ( II (I JeD) hJlII ojilferlld tllirl erb(lt r(ICOPJltJ iii tilt ieiln J Idllltll NeW York Holt Rinehart amp iINon
Plucker J A amp kInrire J (1 l9()) lldel11il sllnilbilin ill high-pOIClHill middle school StlldllltS Cifra (hlld I() --1middot1
Rahinmviu 0 CIar R (llJH)) Cq rulturc Ilnd proces in high U)11Pl lent plrr()rmOlllcmiddot In I D Horcmill 0 1 OBrkn ([k) 111 1111r1Ii1fmte4
11 perpeelIlc (PI -)-)8) ahjn~[oil DC rmCIIlCn ycltologkJI
-soc ia[i 0 n
RohimoJl amp Clinkcnbeard l R (1 ))8) Clftcdncss An cxccprlonaiirv examined
AIIlliltl1 RIIicll j) 11- 151
Ruh1I1 L amp RcI S ((()() Pancrn ohdi~rcglliatiotl jl(men of strHcS
lISC 11llOllg I[)v-Khiing mel high-lchicing univnsin sludlHs ROi lt11leu 8 14K-I
Rv(m 1 (I )k+) loniwring [Xl (ol1lprci1lnsion Inciiidud dirkrcllns in
ul gttandards JOIIiIId
SaL U (2004) A npls ()fhiftd adobccnrsoilld
Schummll 1 (I ))l 11 lOllccprualilllriol1 O(CpiSlcllloiogical hdicl~ and thcir
role 011 kamint In R (lrtlCr ( i A Alexander (Lds) dOllIiX( lid ilitJlC
(iOIl Itit tCXI 2i--fOI liillbJc 1 LlTClllC Erlblllll1
Scitorn1l1er 1 amp DUIlIlLil l 1Jrl Epistcmologicti bdd~ or littcd high chuol
studcllls RalIi 19 1-middot1 )(
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
SChOlllll1(
enul
J7I Shieci
d ir )l)-
Shore II
chilei JlIT
Shore H
dllf
i( ) Sowell
1()
i
Span I
Stcinc I
a rmiddot fl]
SrlillC1 i
In Srcrnh~l
L f Slnnh_
(
Suhotl1~
fhollLh
ch
11lt 111 __
~ ~ tcshy
ri
choo
DESICNED FiT
Schommer-AikinsL Duell 0 K amp Hurter R (2005) Epistemological mathshy
emarical probkm-solving beliefs and academic of middle school students
Ihe 105289-304 Shieer S amp ]1aker C J 199-) Enrichment and acceleration An meniew 1I1d new
directions In ~ Colangelo amp C Davis Haildboo edllcation 99-110) Boston Allm amp Bacon
Shore B M (2000) ktacognitiol1 and Hexibilitmiddot differences in how gifted
children think In R C Friedman amp B 1 Shore (Elk) rllllts ulljf)dillg CogshylIitioli and dlleopllllt 16--1Sn vrashil1gton DC American PsChological
Association
Shore B 1 amp Irving J (200j) Inquirv as a Il(dagogicallink hetween expnie lnc
giftedness111e lbili( lI1d inquin resc1ch group at 1cCili Lnhmiddotcrir
fwd tofld IlIteliirUllilidl O( 1)5-40
Shore B fL amp Lazar 1 (1996) differences in time alltlcatiol1 Irhlc-m
-8 11411-S49
Sowell L R 1cters()ll B S lhol11pon P 1 e1cuIllLmiddot S [ Il~nklt nill L amp lc)gl A V (2003l bpping cortical Cross rhe human lit~ pan MUIII
iVmoicillIr( () 309-51 i
Span )1 amp Oertool11-COrSIll iL R (19H6) Informatioll ng hmiddot intellectual
pupils sullillg Illarhcmuical prohlems Frill(tlliolldl Stil 1 Alarfeillrltio -
273-291 SteineL H H amp Carr 1 12(05) C
more preci undersundinf of Hrclgr RIIiCli 15 21)-21
denmiddotlopl11lnt in children Toward
di fferenccs ill i mel Iigencl Ldi(tltlOlIr
Stcimmiddotr H H amp Clrr 1 (200() 1 r(ldolIIl11t oproJIeil -ollilI Iii gijicrl lllirl Ilmgl~iiil) (fidllll lc(rr(J liml d(fo(illiilt to edliCtiolliI
I-bllppauge lY Ioa Science
Srnnbcrg R J (Ed) (191-12) flIIrll)(o ahliililll illllllgolec ~e York Cambridge
Unlnsir Press
StLrnberg RI (2()()~ L hroJd ie or il1telligencefllc thl(l~ of sllcccssful
COllilltilig lotrildmiddot Jritti(1 illlt R(tllc 55 15)-1 i-l
Sllbotnik R F (2()(Ul doicC1[ pathway to lmll1LIllC ill seicnlL Lcsom irom the
music COIlSLratoIY III P CLTmch- amp L ledcrlllltln (hisl SUOi([ (rII(lItioll [tllII
rnmitllloi( i1Hd pllblli 2)i-502) Burke lOS Pre
lhonl1sI- (200S) RCiing and
ethnicity Il()n~ gifted high SdlOUI sllIdcJl(
Wluing 1 (1989) Logical IllCe-sln to mlkc line graphs j(llnldl itl middotcima J( 3-1-3 -q
Veins[Ock 1 )culllan Y amp iaiuk 1 2()) I) liing thc point or [hL nomh
of wdcllts to icklltit Ltliaiouo argumiddot I11cnts )( 1) -94
Wilkinson V K amp 1)lt)1 i Ih influencc of collegc stmle-nt
logical Ull clecrlLi to h- i 11 ~ prO(SL~ ([Ier rcb iN UJ~Ji()
Vilkinsoll X K amp Sdmart l II I 9fCllhc oricllLltioll I gittLd
adolcsccnrs 11 tL (d 11[ model Reports hJ r6-l)-k
Young E (2001 hyJun(i rlh l)uildillg blocks ()tlir~ fJ COlriu j(gt--+H
A Guide to Recommended Practices
19
GALLAGHER20
Yurgelun-1()dd D A amp Kilgore X D (2006) harmiddotmiddotre8ted acridt in the prefrontal
cortex increases with age during adolescence A preliminary f1RI study Neuroscience Lmer406194-19()
Zhang L F (J 999) Furrher cross-cultural validation of rill theory of menul self-governshymenr journal 133 16)-1)1
Zhang L F amp atkins D (200 II Cognitivc dcvcloplllll1t llld stUdcnt approaches to
learning An investigation ofPerns theor~ vith Clullcse and US uniersitv students Higher EduCfltiol1 41239-2(1
SUSANr
We
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
7
r
i shy
[
J
[
DESIGNED TO FIT
fall into drill and rote memorization Concepts help organize facts resulting in more meaningful connections and expert-like thinking (Shore amp Irving 2005)
Disciplinary or Interdisciplinary Content
Understanding the need for a deep concept-centered knowledge base is only pardy useful it also is necessar~ to know how to focus the knowledge Compelling
arguments can be made in two directions On one hand opportunity for early
specialization is essential tor students with exemplary talent (jarvin amp Subotnik
2006) Early specialization also makes sense for many students whose chosen career
may require many years ofschooling On the other hand the modern age is marked by unique combinations of traditional disciplines into new fields (Klein 19(3) and innovation is often the resulr of cross-disciplinary application similar to the use of linguistics to decode the DNA sequence (Young 20tH) Ultimately tilL
most effective programs for gifted adolescents provide the choice ro eithergt) wide
or deep whil~ ensuring some exposure ro deep disciplinary thinking and original
interdisciplinary connections regardless of the direction students take In sum gifted students arc capable of learning substantially more content
than their peers They also have earlv capacity for abstract thought which both
adds a of contenr and helps organize bcmal inr(lrmation Building a gifted students knowledge baslt maklts sense especially because this knowledge base is a
predictor of academic sliccess Ensuring that gifted students fond as they are of novel tv remain engaged in learning requires the presentation of content that
bull presents information using instructional models that Elcilitate idenrificashy
tion and creation of meaningful connections
bull allmvs for inductive and deductivlt connections between facts and absrract ideas
bull incorporates time specifically f()1 cultivation of abstract reasoning and bull encourages either deep exploration of one diScipline (with exposure to
inrerdisciplinary thought) or wide exploration of several disciplines (with
exposure to deep exploration in one field)~or both
Frequent Opportunities for Higher Order Thinking
Ihe knowledge base gifted students acquire may he impressie but it is ultishy
mnely fairly useless unless rhev pur that knowledge ro work with the help thinking strategies SurprisinglY (he research base on gifted adolecents unique
chinking arrribnrcs is thin in both gifted education and cognitive science research
on how cognitive difhrenccs dCIclop is virtuallv nonexistent (Steiner amp Carr 2003)
The research that is available tltnds to tocus on three interrelated areas ( JI strategic thinking metacognitioI1 and (5) cxpen thinking
Thinking to Slow Down Gifted students generallv use the same set of srratltgies that other students use so in terms of sheer number of
A Guide to Recommended Practices
8 CALLAGHER
strategies employed they do not seem difFerent from other students (Hong 1999)
However gifted students learn more quickly and when r~lCcd with a challenging
task they use more complex ftlfmS of strategies and often seleer sophisticated
strategies lSteiner amp Carr 2006) Having more contenr at their disposal they have
the capacity to use thinking strategies to more original ends As obvious as it may
seem however it bears emphasizing that there is a difFerence berween knowing a
strategy and using a strategy Evidence suggests that gifted studenrs only use their
critical thinking srrategies when they perceive a need that is when the challenge
of a task merits their use (Hong 199))
Gifted students advantage with thinking strategies is especiallv apparent when
they are engaged in prohlem solving Cdred srudenrs tend to show a greater explicit
knowledge of problcm-sohing stages know more problem-solving strategies and
are more adepr in selecting strategies to usc when t~1Ced h an open-ended problem
111ey also are more inclined to switch from one strategy to another when necesshy
sary (Kanevskv 1 ()92) [he sucngrh gitred studenrs demonstrate is evident even
in the absence of direct instruction in problem solving gifted stLIdenrs seem to
invent strltegies when needed (lonrague 1991) Xhile they 1re problem solving
t1st-learning gifted studenrs slow down taking more time to plan and strategize
(Davidson amp Sternberg 1 ()84 Shore amp Lazar 1996) [n addition they show early
tendencies toward expert-like behavior when prohlem solving content knowledge
may strengthen this tendencv (Cherne Jinter amp Cherney 20()))
In sunllnary gitred smdcl1[s dCl11onsrrlfe superior performance in a wide range
of thinking skills which they use well and selectivelv However gifted stlldellts
use these skills onh when faced with meaningful challenges Ensuring that gifted
srudenrs develop their skills in critical thinking requires
bull consranr exposure to challenging conrent
bull tasks more challenging than aYcrage requiring the use of critical
thinking
bull reflective time to engage III problem finding planning and cOllcepmai
reasoning and
bull an oer111 p1(e curriculum 1Ild instruction in which time saved a a result
of ra~lid COlHenr learning is spellt on more difficult complex thinking
Afelflcog1lii(JIl In the cark 1))-10 Sternberg (I (JH2 propoed that l11ctacognishy
tion the ability to Oversee and manage thinking is an important flCwr in gifted
pertl)rmlt1nceAfter two decades of research a more specitlc hut unexpected picshy
mre has emerged ofgittcd studel[~ llse of l11ctacognitiol1 AltilOugh it is dear that
mcr1cognirion is a component or cXLmpL1r pertl)rmaI1Ce gifted students do nO[
show a clcar-cut pcrtlJrmance adYll1tagl In tlcr there lfC on two areas of metashy
cognition where gitred studclHS COlbistlIlrV show superior performance (1) gifted
student knowledge 1hollt speLdic iemling strategics and i) their indination to
usc a skill in a ncw usual gteIting Iso known IS far rrlmt~I (Carr amp Alexanmiddot
der 1996 Robinson 0 ClinhmiddotnbLlld 19()x Span amp Cherroom-Corsmit 1986)
Other s[udie of l11l[~K()gl1itiun hem onk a slight adYltllHlge gitred studenrs
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
son
iu
pn till
(tr
11 [
the
S( 1
th
d~ tic
() le1
tiH
flU
dmiddot l
Lu
Inl I
1lt1 li
j ri
bull
pot
hlll I
SlrLI
Pl Sh )
DtSIGNED TO FIT 9
~-~I~Jl~
-itd
~~l
lLmiddot [
- 1HJ
tlcd
ci[lmiddotd
ci picshy
cr tilar
I()11 to
~ cxanshy l)-())
lt lLLms
some show inferior performance among gifted youth (Dresel amp Haugwitz 2005
Ludlow amp Woodrum 1982) At first glance these findings seem counrerintuitive Why wouldnt gifted stushy
dents show the same advantage in metacognition that they have in learning content
and using thinking skills Carr and Alexander (1996) presenred three plausible
explanations First the tasks llsed in metacognitive research especially research on
near transfer may be so easy that gifted srudenrs do well without monitoring their
performance 111is would explain vhy gifted students are similar to their peers in
their use of metacognitive skills on near transfer tasks but consistently perform betshy
ter on far transfer tasks Far transfer tasks offer a greater challenge requiring gifted
smdems to engage in sdf-monitoring Drescl and Haugwitz (200)) conducted a
classroom-based study that reintorces this notion finding that gifted students did
nO[ use self-regulating behavior if thev thought an assignment was easy Based on
their study they concluded the finding that students with high abilities use
strategies less frequentlv in regular school lessons can be seen as an indication that
their learning environment is inadequately low (p I )) In order ro provide
gifced students with the same amount of practice in self-regulation as average stushy
dems they must work as frequently with tasks the find challenging-I11e alternashy
tive is to leave these skills undeveloped underdeveloped or poorly ckvcloped
Second the relationship between metacognition and IQ lllay have a threshshy
old dlCct lQ may predict skilled LIse of metacognition up to a point Once the
threshold is crossed I(~ docs not guarantee that children will acquire or usc
cognitive skills such as Illcracognitioll believed to promote high achievement
1l1ese cognitie kills appear to deeop instead our ofel11crging expertise (Carr
amp Alexander 19W) p 214) 111 iId the generic conrent-free nature of research tasks may be both u nrcal istic
and unlikelv to [eltal gifted performance difFerences Research Oil expert perforshy
mance suggests that cognitivc monitoring realh is on necessary after thc student
develops I deep and signif1cam body of discipline-based coment (Chi Glaser amp Em 19RR Rabinowitz amp Glaser 19Wi)
In SLIm gifted students have accts) to seWregulatory lwhaviors but lise them
inconsistenrh- Llltctive self-regulation is relatcd both to ltlcademic success and to
adlllt expert percml) 111 cO Ensuring that gifted students have adequate practice
wirh a wide range of metltlcognitivc skills requires
bull constanr exposure ro chaltnging Cllmcnr
bull learn j ng tasks slIfficicn tk d iftlcul r to requi re sOl f-regulation 1l1el bull immersion in disciplinan-hased CO I1(C 11(
EjJfrtis( and 1migh r i nw expert performance prmides ] guideshy
post trll planning programs ttlr gifred adolescenrs because we aspire for Ihll11 ro become experts or innomiddotlt1wrs in their chosen field Research filldings conrinul ro
strengthen the rit between gifrlmiddotd srudenrs thought processes and rhar of domainshy
specitlc expertS (Gorodetsb 0 -hlir 2003 Klll till an Genrile amp Bacr 200) Shore 2(00) Common charlc-rnirics ~llreadv discllssed include rapid acquisirion
A Guide to Recommended Practices
GALLAGHER10
of content skill and flexibility in critical thinking and self-regulation Gifted srudenrs seem to intuitively have some expert-like skills (Kaufman er ai 2005) while others are only acquired through training (Cherney et ai 2005)
Reviewing the literature on expertise Carr and Alexander (1996) pointed our
that it more than skill and ability to be an expert Although experts need sufficient general ability (IQ) to perf()fm at a high level other such as task
commitmenr a sttOng knowledge and social suppOrt are more important tor developing expertise and promoting achievement through expertise (p 214) Ihe list of teguiremenrs for expertise also includes perspective forward problem solving persistence risk taking and tacit knowledge professional language and behaviors Jarvin amp Sllbornik 2006 Shore 2000 Sternberg 2(03) Expershy
tise in this larger sense can be devcoped using curriculum and instruction
emphasize problem solving open-ended questions construction ofideas multiple
perspectives and exposure to disciplinary experts (Gallagher 2006 Shore amp Irving
2005 Sternberg 2003 Sllbornik 2003) [11 sum gifted students cognitivl characteristics parallel those of adult lxperts
Ensuring thar gifted srudlnts continue to develop lxperr-like skills requires
bull exposure to explicit and tacit dbciplinary knowledge bull time to engage in flexibll thinking with disciplinary and interdisciplinary
content
bull curriculum and instruction thar incorporate inquiry cOl1ceptuallearning and authentic conrexts and
bull opportunities f(lI problem solving and mentorships
The Role of Student Perspective Epistemology
Still missing is perhaps t11l most importanr rlCror abollt the education ofgifred adole~cellts Etons to design effective programs and promote new kinds of practice will be for naught if thc srudems themselves do not recognize the significance or
valuc in (he tasks assigned [ he t(JrI11 of perspecrivl in question is tpistemgy ones abo lit rhe nature
of knowledge Perry (1 presel1[ed a developmental scheme that made direct
and pragmatic application [0 the classroom tor it described both how students
views of knowledge change Ocr time and also the powerful eteCt ditering views
have in the classroom Perrys scheme presents nine distincr positions that can be collapsed into four broad suges as sUlllmarized by Gallagher (2006)
Dualism Marked by a black-and-white perspective srudents at rhis sragl
believe aillegirimate questions have certain anSWlrs So-called questions without answers are jmt nOl1seme questions pointless
Multiplicity Stlldents acknowledge that there arc a kw unanswered
questions hut hdiCL dur in the absence of an ltlnswer all opinions on the matter are egualk alid
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Student
III
kl(
[h
hu [he ~J
() r
lV ~ rk Illmiddot
I I ~
id
11
kJ
11 DESIGNED TO FIT
middot dti t
1 __1
tl
n~
u~url
- l i rlcl
cLnt~
~ leWS
-1-1 be
lll1
Contextual Relativism Unanswered questions are investigated using the
tools provided by each discipline each discipline approaches questions in a different wav Certain amwers are unlikely bur a best ansver can
be achieved using the proper rools
CommitmentDialectic Theories are used [() set directions for imporshy
cam questions most of which have no right or wrong answers Gaining understanding requires building upon the possibilities presented by dara as interpreted by a consciously selected point ofview bur with willingness
to change perspective if rhe need arises (p 436)
l~lble 1 presents the f(lUr stages aligned with the beliefs about learning that Iecomshy
pany each stage For a more concrete example comider Carl and Cedric two students waitshy
ing for class to begin Carl believes rlwt knowledge means fH-rS and being knowledgeable means remembering lots of bets Cedric 011 the other band
thinks that knowledge is the abilitv to combine bcts to create ideas For Cedric
being knowledgeable isnt aboll[ the numher of ElCts he knows its ahout how the [Kts can form and rd()fIll to create diffltrent ideas Their teacher Ms Morshy
gan starts her lecture on the Trail oflCars f()(using on the sequence of even ts
detailing what who and when Carl picks up his pen and starts studiously takshying notes Cedric slumps down in his desk grumbling [lCtoids-lbe two boys
hear the same lccrure bom the same teacher but their ditterent belids abour
knowledge afftC[ bow willing they are to accept the inf()rmation as meaningful or valid
A numher ofrheories nmv artempt to describe aspects ofepistel11ological develshyopment (Baxter 1agolda 1987 King amp Kitchener 1994 Schommer 1994) Each theory describes sequen tiaL developmentalmovemenr from a low or naive stance in which knowledge is equated with flctllal inr()Jmation and memorization to
a high or mature stance in which bets are used ro build theories from a
consciollsly selected point ofview but with willingness w change perspective if the need arises (C~lllagher 2006 p 43(1) In the example above Carl holds a navc
stallce and thu~ is happy to gather up a list of taCtS from the lecture Cedrics stance
is more mature and he wishes the flcts had been embedded in more meaningful ideas
Je ComprelJemizie Irnptlct (1Fpitemgy At one level the impact of Carls
and Cedrics differing heliefs is immediately apparent Students are not like ro learn what the do 110 helilVl to be Illeaningfu-or at least they wont learn it
t()r long After two decades of reselrch into the effeC( of epistemology on karning
it is clear that the impact extends hevond whether students like whl( thl learn to
a number of other important ilCldll1lic Ol[COll1es dCllciemil ilcJitlJcmcnt Using a structural equation
analysis Cano (2005) f()ulld that high school students epistemological stance had
both direct and indirect effects 011 academic achievement Similar results have been
A Guide to Recommended Practices
Stages of Epistemological
Development(3
co Beliefs 3 Associated With the Positionl shyVgt rI)
1 rI) ~
~ -shy
Instruction That C
Matches~
shyshy Epistemological Vgt ngt Stage 0 l- -lt Instruction That Vgt Encourages c shy Movement to a ~ Higher Stage
Earlier Positions
r 0 ~ ~
T 4~ r r r ~
TABLI 1
Perrys StagesPositions of Epistemological Reasoning and Related Instructional Strategies
-
Dualism Multiplicity Relativism
Knowledge is cer- Some questions have I Knowledge is interpreted tam (right or wrong) no certain answers in and unambiquous these cases knowledge
I in context distinguishing better from worse answers
and truth are subjec- Irequires selecting theories Authorities (teachers) live so everyones opinshy Ih b jt he quPtiouknow The Truth ion is eq~llyvalid
Activities that help Practice in comparshy Practice in creating students develop skill ing hypotheses and
comparing and select-
in memorization and theories acknowledgshy ing preferable theoshyrecall mnemonics etc ing all possibilities retical models
in exoert behaviors
Exposure to lems with more than in different disciplines one right answer andl to conduct research or more than one construct theories approach to a solution and make decisions
RanCJe of Typical School Senior
Range of Gifted High School Senior
~ ~ I g C shy ~ n ~ -5 ~ ~ ~ ~ shy
~- ~ ~r r rshy - shyr r l
~ r- r
2-~ r- shy shy
~
r r
I CommitmentDialectic
Knowledge methods are and uncertain Choices require analysis and values
Later Positions
n Z 0 l ln 0r
~ shy~
N
( raquo shyraquo CI J
0
13 DESIGNED TO FIT
found with middle school srudenrs (Schommer-Aikins Duell amp 11l[ter 2005) Studenrs at lower levels may have trouble correcring misconceptions and draw
only fact-based information from inquiry-oriented environments (Ryan ] 984) Epistemological Jtanee aJectJ ildvanced academic performance Students with
more advanced belief have an easier time building logical arguments (Weinstock
Kellman amp Tabak 2(04) they tend to choose thinking strategies that Slipport
deep rather than surface learning (Cano 2005 Zhang amp Watkins 2(01) Kitchshy
enet (1983) also suggested that students selectioll of meracognirive strategies can
be affected by their epis((mologicai beliefs Support for this idea comes from a study by Ruban and Reis (2006) who found that high-achieving students tended
to select cnhancemem oriented learning strategies while lower achieving srudents
selected survival oriented strategies
Illstruction can encourage )WIemem to higber epistemological elcTelChers
can affecr changes in students epistemological thinking through intentionally
structllred learning experiences (Kloss 1094 Kronholm 1993l Strategies recomshy
mended to dCc1op epistemological thinking include using ill-structured problems
and instructional straregics thar allow srudenrs to examine their assumptions anashy
lyze data that present different conHicting perspectiyes and then make decisions
(King amp Kitchener 20(4) Devoting some time to direct instruction about tbe
narure of the discipline helps develop higher levels of reasoning (Bdl 20(4) vhmltltch bet1 iecn instructiol t7 lid epistemoogiCtl Itllnee (pnspect i IJt) colltributes
to jruurrltiol[ (wd disillusiolllJlflll Cedric didnt respond well when Ms Marrin
started a f1Cr-based lecture Over time he will simply decide that school is trivial
or worse meaningless Had Ms 1artin staned imtead with a discllssion of the
violation of Native Americans sense of personhood Cedric wOllld have been
thrilled and Carl would hae been lost This kind of disparity creates barriers to
learning (Nelson 19()6 PelTY 1(70) --Jebel and Schommer-Aikins (2002) f()lnd
that a mismatch between insrruction and stance caused work avoidance among
some high school phYsics students Lovell and lunnefY (2004) ltJUnd that srudents
even found small-group work Illore Itisfing when they Vere grouped according
to sranct (perspecrhc)
Giftrd tlldCIIpound1 tmel to tlJead iii epistemgical dezclopllllllt Stll(iiLs of adoshylescents doculllent that cpistemological belicts mature in a pndioablc dcvelopshy
mental sequcnce (Cano 200) Zhang amp latk ins 2(01) In parallcl to formal
operational reasoning gifred rdoiesccl1t move through episremologicli stges in
the same sequence (Ihomas 2()08) but tend to be a stage or rwo ahead of orlIer
rhe same age (Arlin amp LCirr Il))X Goldberger 1981 Schollll11er I Dunnell
1997 ~n1Omas) 2008 Wilkinsoll I Iaxwcll 1991 iilkinsoll amp Schw~lrtz 19X-1
Lible 1 provides a general seme of the distribution of senior year studcm baSell on existing research
Adult experts tend to holt IlrlzlIIeal epi)tllIIologimlliClls -Ihc epistcl11ojogicri
framework also provides a UHl1lCtiOIl to anuther aspect of experrisc -CIO the
disciplines the behaviors and l([irlllk associared with mature episrel11ologv arc
A Guide to Recommended Practices
[
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
gt ~ ~--------------
GALLAGHER14
considered essential for advanced authentic work (Buehl amp Alexander 2005 Felder 1997 Henderson 1995 Kloss 1994 Muis 20(4)
Connections With G~fted Education Evidence that gifted students tend ro
be somewhat ahead of their age-mates in epistemological development follows
naturally from the data on formal operations reponed above However other
inreresting connections bring this theon into cohesion with existing knowledge
of giftltd students for example there is some indication that people who prlttCr
Intuition on the Jhers-Briggs Type Inventory tend [() have higher epistemologishy
cal stances (Zhang 199()) Cifted rudents overwhelmingly report this prdlrenCl
(Sak 2004) and the connecrion gives further evidencc that giftcd students will
respond best to open-ended inquiry-oriented learning environments Similarly
it explains gifted adolescents positive response to mentOr relationships Like
all adolescents gifted reenagers want to see similarities bcrween themselves and
others in mentors they find kindred spirits who think abour ideas from similar
frames of mind
Most exciting perhaps is the COil necrion between epistell1oosY md expertise
Not only do gifted students show earlv potential to achieve the expens high levels
of reasoning bur also epistell1ologicalll10deis provide a guide to he p explain how [() move all students closer to authentic higher order reasoning Callagher (l99X) suggested that models slIch as these would make effecdve frameworks for designing
high school curriculum providing an organic model for differentiation Based on
his study of adolescent epistelllological beliefs Cano (200raquo) concurred
it is necessary to take into account nor only students previous knowlshy
edge and learning strategies bur also their learning approaches and
epistemological beliefs Secondlv wc should work directly to try to
enhance [he depth of learning approaches and the complexity of episshy
temological belid~ as way of improving academic achievemenc (p 217)
Finally this framework reinforces the notion that the outcomes tt)r ignorshy
ing srudents beliefs are grave Srudents have trouble accepting the relevance of
instrtlLtion that is out of sync with their stag (Perr- ]970) a finding that is
consonant with the well-established knowledge that gifred adolescents reject munshy
dane repetitive curriculum hlrrher gifted students operating at higher levels than
other students find instrllction orienred towards the majorit uninspiring and
communicate their feelings through underachievement More sltriollsly perhaps
Nelson (1989) cautioned that excessive time spent in low-lenl curriculum actively
builds a wall of habit that blocks the path to higher level reasoning Even rapid
acceleration can havc this d~magillg eftect ifstudenrs are onlv accelerated into nev
low-level content It) prmidl a climl[e read for higher order thinking educators
must present COIltCIH that is accelerated vertically as well as horizomalh-
CI [
tCl ~I
1
lhe IS 110 i I
and fUc
hest n~II
15
bull - r
~ shy
~
~n( )1shy
()f ut I
l1UI1shy
[hm
inti
lpid
DLltiCNEl) TO m
Complete Coherence Evidence-Based Recommendations for
Differentiation in Secondary School
Each of the perspecrivcs considercc1 in this rationale is championed h differshy
ent researchers operating from different paradigms and using differenr research
techniques Even so their respectin findings arc remarkably similar
1 Gifted adolescents nced exposure [0 ~l larger quanrity of coment that
the find dnllenging Beginning at least in middle schooL abstract conshy
tenr should he a srandard part of their curriculum I he importlnle of developing a plenriful high-quality wcll of information i essLlHial as
it is a precursor to using higher order thinking ll1etJcognitivc thinking
and abstract thinking Cifted students will lot adequJtek develop their
thinking skills without this knowledge base 2 A quality knowledge bZlse is neCssary hilt notutticilmiddotllt ItH developing
thinking skilk Ciftecl studenrs 1lUt be presented with Ierning experishy
ences that require them to engage their critical thinking skills and metlshy
cognitive skills If they do not find their assignments challenging their
brains willilot engage their higher order functions T()gether content and
strategv med along ith metacognition predict academic perf()[mltlnce
making the simultalleous devdopmenr of these three paramount
3 Cifted students show earl~ promise t()r deydoping expertise Capitalizi ng
on that earlv promise requires instruction where stlldems Gl1 practice the
qualities of expcrtbe including open-ended imtruction inquiry-based
instruction problcm-oriented instrucrion field experiences and menrorshy
ships all cCl1[ercd 011 high-qualitv disciplinarv or imcrdisciplinary content
Cifted srudents arc most lihk to sec this instruction as relevant and draw
maximum value hom it
4 Expertisc requircs more thall contLflt and skill habits of mind ~llld
~llhaI1C1d epistemological re~lsoning also arc essentiaL If we aspirc for gifted students-~or for allY s(Udel1l~--to hecome creative productive leadshy
ers in their chosen field curriculutH ~lJld instruction should he selected to
develop these simultaneoush- and include exposure to the philosophies
and (thics of thc disciplines
The absence of a qualin- differerlliated secondary progrll11 flH gifted students
is not a neutral position it is 1 choice that will result in deficit skill dCeopmcnt
and student apathy At worr it ill result in the disillusionment some of the
best minds in the country
A Guide to Recommended Practices
i
GALLAGHER16
References
Arlin P K amp Levin L (1998) A deelopmenta perspc((ic on giftedness
HeetlrcIoltnlld I )4~~5i(1 Baxter Jvlagolda Jvl B (J 987) Comparing open-ended inteljcs lnd standardized mea- Hair
sun of inrelieefUal development ollilla Strfmt PCIJoiJle 28 443~44S -i
BdL E (2004) Promoring StUdUHS argumenr consrrncriOll and collahorativc debate in thc Hell science classfl)om rn ~ 1 C Linn E A Davis amp P Bell (Eds J Imimlt J1lrOltrrIOtS h~middot
seimC IIiCilioll (pp 11 i-145) lal11ah 1 Lawrence Erlballl11
rkrningcr V amp Yates C (J (95) Formal operational thought in rhe gifted A postshy H(ln~
Piagetian pnspecriC Hu(ti (nilli I) 220~224 HUN
Rirnn B L (l991 Formal operHional nlsolling Illodes Predictors of critical thinking
abilit ies alld grade assigned Iw reacher in sciencc and nlarhemltltics il[ student in
grades nine rhrough [tke Ollljli ill Sciei( 28 2()-2~4 InhclcL
Buehl 1 amp Alnlnder P (2001) lorivarion and pnr~HlllaJl(e ditferemes in srudelJ[
dOllllin-specific epiSrllllUI()~illt11 bel iet profiles ilIHlIll FdllClitiolfll NCilllrchOII1i
middoti2 (N-- - 2(
ClIlO I (200i) Lpistcl]ologicai bclid~ IJlld a[lproaches to Icllning Ih~ir through lh secol1dan chool wd their influcncc Oil lCademic pn~lrn1alKe Bllti_f lotmil
tdlildtiOllit -) 205- 221 Kanl
ClIl 1 amp Alexander I (I )()6) Xhere giftd children do 1Ild do nO[ cxcel on llleracogshy
n irin lasb Noel) NcriCiI 18 12lt 1( 1)
Cherne L 11 VinrCl J amp Chlrnc j1 l (200i) NucleH problem s()h-ln~ Kanl
elise stUlh of expert-I1Oicl differences hllliSlletoll fI(the iVdmtI of
Seillle w 1-- hi 11 T H (lascL R amp iarr 1 J (itk) (19HHl Ihc Itttn If
NJ Lawrence Erlbaulll King I
CsiksCIHIll ihali 1 1 Ib rJundt K amp Whakn S ( 1 )94) ]tIIIItc tieillgcn 11( mou of I 1 JifCCC-S Iiiirifllllln Bmrou ( PrlmiddotSS ~
[lidson I L amp I I tJ)Hj)lh roll ofimighr in ilwlIeuual ~ifredncs King l
(dial Child (jlltrtal ]8 is-hi dc Urnl 1 amp lLlll~jl 1 11()()iIlhlmiddot riariollshil hcmlln 1biliriLs and slt1rshy
regllbrld Ic~lrning l ilkncc ti) imcraLTiolb with leIck-mil sdt~lomcpt Ild gender
iglllbiit) lirlI ( 2() 1 ) S
Felder R (19~J 1 kCl our s1Udenrs Dac hrrlLl and Ruhcllo ChtlJiicd KItin
Fdll(iltOi31 10(- j() d Cllb~hcr J l-Llrrallilll C ( 0 (olcn1lt1ll ~1 R (J 9F) UlilIkllgc or boredom Ciftld Ii
tlldIHS ics on rhir ((Pi1 NUiCli 19 132~l(1 iI
Callagher S A (l)lt)H 11 he ((lld 10 ulrinl rhinking I he scheille lilt llleH1in~ht KIo I
ditttTcnriation ii Hill(IiII 8li iL)) 12-20 ic Calb~her S 1 (2()()()1 l rhmiddot to slience expcrtiscmiddot In F Dixon amp S Kronl](I
0100[1 ( l IitI)i u (lllllIO1 [PI 1()~middot+6(J) I1U) TX (n
Irufroc k Prns larson 1
CipsoJ] 1 brdulll 1 0 Ic1111ll L t 19S)1 Rcll(ollhil hC[Cll1 t(lrmal-opltTniullll dlOughr and ttllhclrud ditkulrie in geflLtiS problem IUIilidl ofRlsldJ(f ill --I J gt~
Slilll( ( S 1 1--S2 I Loell (
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
17 DESIGNED TO fiT
ul
IX
Gorodetsky 1 amp Klavir R (2003) What can we learn from how giftedaverage pupils
describe their processes of problem solving) Learning amp Instruction 13 305-326 Grabner R Neubauer A amp Srern E (2006) Superior performance and neural efficiencv
Ihe impact of intelligence and expertise Brain Research Bulletin 69 422-439 Haicr R J JUl1g R E Yeo R A Head K amp Alkire M r (200t) Srrllcrural brain
variHion and general inrelligence Netlroimage J L 425-435 Henderson S (J 995) Vh do I hae ro be here) The Advanced Placement srudelH in
firs(~vear composition Problems and isslles in cognitive development journal ondar) Gifted EduCtlri(Jl 7 )24-532
Hong L (19)9) Swdying the mind of rhe gifted ROfper Relieu 21 244-2)2 Hurst R amp Milkenr 11 (1996) Facilitaring successful prediccion problem gt(living in
biology through application ofskill theor jOllnJal ill Scimce ) 541-)52
Inhclder fl amp Piager j (19)8) the cililrflIor1I IlrO-fi((
Jew York Basic fI()oks
Jarvin L amp Subomik R (2006) Understanding elitc taient ill acadcmil domaim A
dcvclopmcl1(al ttajccwn from hasic ahilities O scholarlv producrivitvcmisfr In E A Dixon amp S 1 Moon (Eek) thc hillidbook (pp205-220) vhco TX Prufrock Press
Kancsky L (1)92) Gifred children and thc learning process Imights on both tlom rhe
rcsearch III E Miinks amp Xi Peters (Eds) J(tlmr r1( (pp 1))middot161) Asscn
Ihe 0lctherlands Van CorClUll
Kanevsky L amp KeighlcvL (2003) 1~) produce or nor ro produce understanding hOi dum and the honor in umkrlchkl111cnr RCIitll26 2()2R
Kauflll]n J C Gentile C r amp Bllf J (200)) Do gifted sflllknr writers and crec)(ive
writing experts raIL lTlcni in till same Child QlltlltCrl 4) 2()O-265 King P v1 amp Kitchener K S (1)94) jll(zr1II IllI
flild illtcllltfli ill flrocsCm fllld (lIn San
Francisco Josse~ Bass
King l 1 amp Kitchencr K S (2004) Iefieltivc judgllllm Ihcorv and research on thl
dtveioplllelH ()f pircmic assllmptions through adulrhood Fdilolfiolltll
YJ(I) )-lR
Kitchener K S (1 )HI) Cogllition Il1ctalugnirioll and episttmic cognition A rhrcltlevel
model of cognitivc pnllc fl1I11II11I )11 dOjJ 1IItl1 I 6 222~252 Klein J T (I ))3) Blurring CLIcking mel crossing Permcation and thc fracturing of
discipline In E lesscr-DlidO D R ShUlllV amp D J Shan (Eds) (Pl 1 Hi-21 I) Charlnwsdle Uniersin
of Virginia Press
Kloss R J (19)4) nudge is hest Helping srudems throllgh rhe Iern schellll of intll
Iccruat Jeel0pllhnr I] I i 1-1 lH
Kronholm M 1 (19J) l Ihe i mp)ct of dCIdnpmenral instruction on rcHen ill iudgmellL
RCIieU ofHigber ErlIldtillll I i 1))-middot2)) Larson R V amp Richmk 1 11 1 L)J 1 ugusr) Boredom in (hi middle scilll() I
ears Blaming schoolgt erus gtIamitlg mdenrs 1l11encdll jOIiJIiI OjliJI(I[JOII 9)
418-44) Lmell C X amp 0unnen j i 2()()i i Tesling the adulr dCelopme1( I()CI of [lahel
hvpothesis HOI1l0gillCOll hmiddot lln position mllaboldtile learning groups and grcldu
ate student sarisfanion tllrtr 11 IY) 1)0
A Guide to Recommended Practices
L GtgtLlA(HER18
Ludlow B L amp Voodrum D T (1)82) Problem-sohing and aerag~
Icarners on a multiple discrimination task (ild
Matthews D amp lkLwghlin T 1)94) EHects otleHIlr-cclHcln acthitics on
achievement and students preterences in [So hiih 5c11Ol lLtrSes HI(tPWdl
fllld AOo)li -8 28)-286 ivlcDonJkl J (I )Kl) Cogniric dcnlopmenr Jnd the rlUdU or geometric contcllr
Rlslrd ill f(ltbcJlldti f((cilwm 20 -11-)4
vlontlgue 1 (19() 1 J Cihnl and Icnning diabkd gifrcd smdllls lise of knowledge and
usc of mrriHIllHicli and prohlem sohing srrarcgic I I(uuioll oftII
11 Y))-+II
middotluis K (2004) ierson(rl cpisrcmologv and marhcmuics - critical rcic and smhesis
of research RcIlli lifdll(lIli()Ii Retii -1 31--3-- Neher H amp Scholllnllr-middotikim 1 (20021 Sclf-regubted ilIKC with hiohl
gitted students l11e rok of cogn it i l l110t i UiOll] L pist cillologicd md cm [ron l1](llshy
[11 (1liahle linif Stili lin 3( I i iC)_-I
Nelson C E (I )8)) Skcwered on th unicorns horn 111lt iluion or the rr(lckotf between content and LTitk1 thinking in the lcaching otsliLllcC [n L X row (Edi
(nth II iii hI j(ltIlaquo rpp 17_-) (lshingrotl DC ]11[onll
Scimee (ltrehers AsOl iou ion
Nelson c E (1 )9() Studellt dicrsir rCl]uircs ditknm appro(lLhcs to collqc tcaciling
Cln in math llld sckncc iIIlT(dl Fiehtllltl(ri S((illhl -10 1(1)-1)
Niaz L amp Robinson Xi (1 j)2) IW1l algllrithmic mode [(l Ol1ccprur1 gCs[1lt in
1Il1lkrstanding rill blhavior of gibe An cpiSlclllOiogic11 pcrspccric Rt(Igt ii)(fshy
IIII 0 ic(bliologiCd hhl(iltiOi J(J )5-(H
Ilttry V ( II (I JeD) hJlII ojilferlld tllirl erb(lt r(ICOPJltJ iii tilt ieiln J Idllltll NeW York Holt Rinehart amp iINon
Plucker J A amp kInrire J (1 l9()) lldel11il sllnilbilin ill high-pOIClHill middle school StlldllltS Cifra (hlld I() --1middot1
Rahinmviu 0 CIar R (llJH)) Cq rulturc Ilnd proces in high U)11Pl lent plrr()rmOlllcmiddot In I D Horcmill 0 1 OBrkn ([k) 111 1111r1Ii1fmte4
11 perpeelIlc (PI -)-)8) ahjn~[oil DC rmCIIlCn ycltologkJI
-soc ia[i 0 n
RohimoJl amp Clinkcnbeard l R (1 ))8) Clftcdncss An cxccprlonaiirv examined
AIIlliltl1 RIIicll j) 11- 151
Ruh1I1 L amp RcI S ((()() Pancrn ohdi~rcglliatiotl jl(men of strHcS
lISC 11llOllg I[)v-Khiing mel high-lchicing univnsin sludlHs ROi lt11leu 8 14K-I
Rv(m 1 (I )k+) loniwring [Xl (ol1lprci1lnsion Inciiidud dirkrcllns in
ul gttandards JOIIiIId
SaL U (2004) A npls ()fhiftd adobccnrsoilld
Schummll 1 (I ))l 11 lOllccprualilllriol1 O(CpiSlcllloiogical hdicl~ and thcir
role 011 kamint In R (lrtlCr ( i A Alexander (Lds) dOllIiX( lid ilitJlC
(iOIl Itit tCXI 2i--fOI liillbJc 1 LlTClllC Erlblllll1
Scitorn1l1er 1 amp DUIlIlLil l 1Jrl Epistcmologicti bdd~ or littcd high chuol
studcllls RalIi 19 1-middot1 )(
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
SChOlllll1(
enul
J7I Shieci
d ir )l)-
Shore II
chilei JlIT
Shore H
dllf
i( ) Sowell
1()
i
Span I
Stcinc I
a rmiddot fl]
SrlillC1 i
In Srcrnh~l
L f Slnnh_
(
Suhotl1~
fhollLh
ch
11lt 111 __
~ ~ tcshy
ri
choo
DESICNED FiT
Schommer-AikinsL Duell 0 K amp Hurter R (2005) Epistemological mathshy
emarical probkm-solving beliefs and academic of middle school students
Ihe 105289-304 Shieer S amp ]1aker C J 199-) Enrichment and acceleration An meniew 1I1d new
directions In ~ Colangelo amp C Davis Haildboo edllcation 99-110) Boston Allm amp Bacon
Shore B M (2000) ktacognitiol1 and Hexibilitmiddot differences in how gifted
children think In R C Friedman amp B 1 Shore (Elk) rllllts ulljf)dillg CogshylIitioli and dlleopllllt 16--1Sn vrashil1gton DC American PsChological
Association
Shore B 1 amp Irving J (200j) Inquirv as a Il(dagogicallink hetween expnie lnc
giftedness111e lbili( lI1d inquin resc1ch group at 1cCili Lnhmiddotcrir
fwd tofld IlIteliirUllilidl O( 1)5-40
Shore B fL amp Lazar 1 (1996) differences in time alltlcatiol1 Irhlc-m
-8 11411-S49
Sowell L R 1cters()ll B S lhol11pon P 1 e1cuIllLmiddot S [ Il~nklt nill L amp lc)gl A V (2003l bpping cortical Cross rhe human lit~ pan MUIII
iVmoicillIr( () 309-51 i
Span )1 amp Oertool11-COrSIll iL R (19H6) Informatioll ng hmiddot intellectual
pupils sullillg Illarhcmuical prohlems Frill(tlliolldl Stil 1 Alarfeillrltio -
273-291 SteineL H H amp Carr 1 12(05) C
more preci undersundinf of Hrclgr RIIiCli 15 21)-21
denmiddotlopl11lnt in children Toward
di fferenccs ill i mel Iigencl Ldi(tltlOlIr
Stcimmiddotr H H amp Clrr 1 (200() 1 r(ldolIIl11t oproJIeil -ollilI Iii gijicrl lllirl Ilmgl~iiil) (fidllll lc(rr(J liml d(fo(illiilt to edliCtiolliI
I-bllppauge lY Ioa Science
Srnnbcrg R J (Ed) (191-12) flIIrll)(o ahliililll illllllgolec ~e York Cambridge
Unlnsir Press
StLrnberg RI (2()()~ L hroJd ie or il1telligencefllc thl(l~ of sllcccssful
COllilltilig lotrildmiddot Jritti(1 illlt R(tllc 55 15)-1 i-l
Sllbotnik R F (2()(Ul doicC1[ pathway to lmll1LIllC ill seicnlL Lcsom irom the
music COIlSLratoIY III P CLTmch- amp L ledcrlllltln (hisl SUOi([ (rII(lItioll [tllII
rnmitllloi( i1Hd pllblli 2)i-502) Burke lOS Pre
lhonl1sI- (200S) RCiing and
ethnicity Il()n~ gifted high SdlOUI sllIdcJl(
Wluing 1 (1989) Logical IllCe-sln to mlkc line graphs j(llnldl itl middotcima J( 3-1-3 -q
Veins[Ock 1 )culllan Y amp iaiuk 1 2()) I) liing thc point or [hL nomh
of wdcllts to icklltit Ltliaiouo argumiddot I11cnts )( 1) -94
Wilkinson V K amp 1)lt)1 i Ih influencc of collegc stmle-nt
logical Ull clecrlLi to h- i 11 ~ prO(SL~ ([Ier rcb iN UJ~Ji()
Vilkinsoll X K amp Sdmart l II I 9fCllhc oricllLltioll I gittLd
adolcsccnrs 11 tL (d 11[ model Reports hJ r6-l)-k
Young E (2001 hyJun(i rlh l)uildillg blocks ()tlir~ fJ COlriu j(gt--+H
A Guide to Recommended Practices
19
GALLAGHER20
Yurgelun-1()dd D A amp Kilgore X D (2006) harmiddotmiddotre8ted acridt in the prefrontal
cortex increases with age during adolescence A preliminary f1RI study Neuroscience Lmer406194-19()
Zhang L F (J 999) Furrher cross-cultural validation of rill theory of menul self-governshymenr journal 133 16)-1)1
Zhang L F amp atkins D (200 II Cognitivc dcvcloplllll1t llld stUdcnt approaches to
learning An investigation ofPerns theor~ vith Clullcse and US uniersitv students Higher EduCfltiol1 41239-2(1
SUSANr
We
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
8 CALLAGHER
strategies employed they do not seem difFerent from other students (Hong 1999)
However gifted students learn more quickly and when r~lCcd with a challenging
task they use more complex ftlfmS of strategies and often seleer sophisticated
strategies lSteiner amp Carr 2006) Having more contenr at their disposal they have
the capacity to use thinking strategies to more original ends As obvious as it may
seem however it bears emphasizing that there is a difFerence berween knowing a
strategy and using a strategy Evidence suggests that gifted studenrs only use their
critical thinking srrategies when they perceive a need that is when the challenge
of a task merits their use (Hong 199))
Gifted students advantage with thinking strategies is especiallv apparent when
they are engaged in prohlem solving Cdred srudenrs tend to show a greater explicit
knowledge of problcm-sohing stages know more problem-solving strategies and
are more adepr in selecting strategies to usc when t~1Ced h an open-ended problem
111ey also are more inclined to switch from one strategy to another when necesshy
sary (Kanevskv 1 ()92) [he sucngrh gitred studenrs demonstrate is evident even
in the absence of direct instruction in problem solving gifted stLIdenrs seem to
invent strltegies when needed (lonrague 1991) Xhile they 1re problem solving
t1st-learning gifted studenrs slow down taking more time to plan and strategize
(Davidson amp Sternberg 1 ()84 Shore amp Lazar 1996) [n addition they show early
tendencies toward expert-like behavior when prohlem solving content knowledge
may strengthen this tendencv (Cherne Jinter amp Cherney 20()))
In sunllnary gitred smdcl1[s dCl11onsrrlfe superior performance in a wide range
of thinking skills which they use well and selectivelv However gifted stlldellts
use these skills onh when faced with meaningful challenges Ensuring that gifted
srudenrs develop their skills in critical thinking requires
bull consranr exposure to challenging conrent
bull tasks more challenging than aYcrage requiring the use of critical
thinking
bull reflective time to engage III problem finding planning and cOllcepmai
reasoning and
bull an oer111 p1(e curriculum 1Ild instruction in which time saved a a result
of ra~lid COlHenr learning is spellt on more difficult complex thinking
Afelflcog1lii(JIl In the cark 1))-10 Sternberg (I (JH2 propoed that l11ctacognishy
tion the ability to Oversee and manage thinking is an important flCwr in gifted
pertl)rmlt1nceAfter two decades of research a more specitlc hut unexpected picshy
mre has emerged ofgittcd studel[~ llse of l11ctacognitiol1 AltilOugh it is dear that
mcr1cognirion is a component or cXLmpL1r pertl)rmaI1Ce gifted students do nO[
show a clcar-cut pcrtlJrmance adYll1tagl In tlcr there lfC on two areas of metashy
cognition where gitred studclHS COlbistlIlrV show superior performance (1) gifted
student knowledge 1hollt speLdic iemling strategics and i) their indination to
usc a skill in a ncw usual gteIting Iso known IS far rrlmt~I (Carr amp Alexanmiddot
der 1996 Robinson 0 ClinhmiddotnbLlld 19()x Span amp Cherroom-Corsmit 1986)
Other s[udie of l11l[~K()gl1itiun hem onk a slight adYltllHlge gitred studenrs
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
son
iu
pn till
(tr
11 [
the
S( 1
th
d~ tic
() le1
tiH
flU
dmiddot l
Lu
Inl I
1lt1 li
j ri
bull
pot
hlll I
SlrLI
Pl Sh )
DtSIGNED TO FIT 9
~-~I~Jl~
-itd
~~l
lLmiddot [
- 1HJ
tlcd
ci[lmiddotd
ci picshy
cr tilar
I()11 to
~ cxanshy l)-())
lt lLLms
some show inferior performance among gifted youth (Dresel amp Haugwitz 2005
Ludlow amp Woodrum 1982) At first glance these findings seem counrerintuitive Why wouldnt gifted stushy
dents show the same advantage in metacognition that they have in learning content
and using thinking skills Carr and Alexander (1996) presenred three plausible
explanations First the tasks llsed in metacognitive research especially research on
near transfer may be so easy that gifted srudenrs do well without monitoring their
performance 111is would explain vhy gifted students are similar to their peers in
their use of metacognitive skills on near transfer tasks but consistently perform betshy
ter on far transfer tasks Far transfer tasks offer a greater challenge requiring gifted
smdems to engage in sdf-monitoring Drescl and Haugwitz (200)) conducted a
classroom-based study that reintorces this notion finding that gifted students did
nO[ use self-regulating behavior if thev thought an assignment was easy Based on
their study they concluded the finding that students with high abilities use
strategies less frequentlv in regular school lessons can be seen as an indication that
their learning environment is inadequately low (p I )) In order ro provide
gifced students with the same amount of practice in self-regulation as average stushy
dems they must work as frequently with tasks the find challenging-I11e alternashy
tive is to leave these skills undeveloped underdeveloped or poorly ckvcloped
Second the relationship between metacognition and IQ lllay have a threshshy
old dlCct lQ may predict skilled LIse of metacognition up to a point Once the
threshold is crossed I(~ docs not guarantee that children will acquire or usc
cognitive skills such as Illcracognitioll believed to promote high achievement
1l1ese cognitie kills appear to deeop instead our ofel11crging expertise (Carr
amp Alexander 19W) p 214) 111 iId the generic conrent-free nature of research tasks may be both u nrcal istic
and unlikelv to [eltal gifted performance difFerences Research Oil expert perforshy
mance suggests that cognitivc monitoring realh is on necessary after thc student
develops I deep and signif1cam body of discipline-based coment (Chi Glaser amp Em 19RR Rabinowitz amp Glaser 19Wi)
In SLIm gifted students have accts) to seWregulatory lwhaviors but lise them
inconsistenrh- Llltctive self-regulation is relatcd both to ltlcademic success and to
adlllt expert percml) 111 cO Ensuring that gifted students have adequate practice
wirh a wide range of metltlcognitivc skills requires
bull constanr exposure ro chaltnging Cllmcnr
bull learn j ng tasks slIfficicn tk d iftlcul r to requi re sOl f-regulation 1l1el bull immersion in disciplinan-hased CO I1(C 11(
EjJfrtis( and 1migh r i nw expert performance prmides ] guideshy
post trll planning programs ttlr gifred adolescenrs because we aspire for Ihll11 ro become experts or innomiddotlt1wrs in their chosen field Research filldings conrinul ro
strengthen the rit between gifrlmiddotd srudenrs thought processes and rhar of domainshy
specitlc expertS (Gorodetsb 0 -hlir 2003 Klll till an Genrile amp Bacr 200) Shore 2(00) Common charlc-rnirics ~llreadv discllssed include rapid acquisirion
A Guide to Recommended Practices
GALLAGHER10
of content skill and flexibility in critical thinking and self-regulation Gifted srudenrs seem to intuitively have some expert-like skills (Kaufman er ai 2005) while others are only acquired through training (Cherney et ai 2005)
Reviewing the literature on expertise Carr and Alexander (1996) pointed our
that it more than skill and ability to be an expert Although experts need sufficient general ability (IQ) to perf()fm at a high level other such as task
commitmenr a sttOng knowledge and social suppOrt are more important tor developing expertise and promoting achievement through expertise (p 214) Ihe list of teguiremenrs for expertise also includes perspective forward problem solving persistence risk taking and tacit knowledge professional language and behaviors Jarvin amp Sllbornik 2006 Shore 2000 Sternberg 2(03) Expershy
tise in this larger sense can be devcoped using curriculum and instruction
emphasize problem solving open-ended questions construction ofideas multiple
perspectives and exposure to disciplinary experts (Gallagher 2006 Shore amp Irving
2005 Sternberg 2003 Sllbornik 2003) [11 sum gifted students cognitivl characteristics parallel those of adult lxperts
Ensuring thar gifted srudlnts continue to develop lxperr-like skills requires
bull exposure to explicit and tacit dbciplinary knowledge bull time to engage in flexibll thinking with disciplinary and interdisciplinary
content
bull curriculum and instruction thar incorporate inquiry cOl1ceptuallearning and authentic conrexts and
bull opportunities f(lI problem solving and mentorships
The Role of Student Perspective Epistemology
Still missing is perhaps t11l most importanr rlCror abollt the education ofgifred adole~cellts Etons to design effective programs and promote new kinds of practice will be for naught if thc srudems themselves do not recognize the significance or
valuc in (he tasks assigned [ he t(JrI11 of perspecrivl in question is tpistemgy ones abo lit rhe nature
of knowledge Perry (1 presel1[ed a developmental scheme that made direct
and pragmatic application [0 the classroom tor it described both how students
views of knowledge change Ocr time and also the powerful eteCt ditering views
have in the classroom Perrys scheme presents nine distincr positions that can be collapsed into four broad suges as sUlllmarized by Gallagher (2006)
Dualism Marked by a black-and-white perspective srudents at rhis sragl
believe aillegirimate questions have certain anSWlrs So-called questions without answers are jmt nOl1seme questions pointless
Multiplicity Stlldents acknowledge that there arc a kw unanswered
questions hut hdiCL dur in the absence of an ltlnswer all opinions on the matter are egualk alid
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Student
III
kl(
[h
hu [he ~J
() r
lV ~ rk Illmiddot
I I ~
id
11
kJ
11 DESIGNED TO FIT
middot dti t
1 __1
tl
n~
u~url
- l i rlcl
cLnt~
~ leWS
-1-1 be
lll1
Contextual Relativism Unanswered questions are investigated using the
tools provided by each discipline each discipline approaches questions in a different wav Certain amwers are unlikely bur a best ansver can
be achieved using the proper rools
CommitmentDialectic Theories are used [() set directions for imporshy
cam questions most of which have no right or wrong answers Gaining understanding requires building upon the possibilities presented by dara as interpreted by a consciously selected point ofview bur with willingness
to change perspective if rhe need arises (p 436)
l~lble 1 presents the f(lUr stages aligned with the beliefs about learning that Iecomshy
pany each stage For a more concrete example comider Carl and Cedric two students waitshy
ing for class to begin Carl believes rlwt knowledge means fH-rS and being knowledgeable means remembering lots of bets Cedric 011 the other band
thinks that knowledge is the abilitv to combine bcts to create ideas For Cedric
being knowledgeable isnt aboll[ the numher of ElCts he knows its ahout how the [Kts can form and rd()fIll to create diffltrent ideas Their teacher Ms Morshy
gan starts her lecture on the Trail oflCars f()(using on the sequence of even ts
detailing what who and when Carl picks up his pen and starts studiously takshying notes Cedric slumps down in his desk grumbling [lCtoids-lbe two boys
hear the same lccrure bom the same teacher but their ditterent belids abour
knowledge afftC[ bow willing they are to accept the inf()rmation as meaningful or valid
A numher ofrheories nmv artempt to describe aspects ofepistel11ological develshyopment (Baxter 1agolda 1987 King amp Kitchener 1994 Schommer 1994) Each theory describes sequen tiaL developmentalmovemenr from a low or naive stance in which knowledge is equated with flctllal inr()Jmation and memorization to
a high or mature stance in which bets are used ro build theories from a
consciollsly selected point ofview but with willingness w change perspective if the need arises (C~lllagher 2006 p 43(1) In the example above Carl holds a navc
stallce and thu~ is happy to gather up a list of taCtS from the lecture Cedrics stance
is more mature and he wishes the flcts had been embedded in more meaningful ideas
Je ComprelJemizie Irnptlct (1Fpitemgy At one level the impact of Carls
and Cedrics differing heliefs is immediately apparent Students are not like ro learn what the do 110 helilVl to be Illeaningfu-or at least they wont learn it
t()r long After two decades of reselrch into the effeC( of epistemology on karning
it is clear that the impact extends hevond whether students like whl( thl learn to
a number of other important ilCldll1lic Ol[COll1es dCllciemil ilcJitlJcmcnt Using a structural equation
analysis Cano (2005) f()ulld that high school students epistemological stance had
both direct and indirect effects 011 academic achievement Similar results have been
A Guide to Recommended Practices
Stages of Epistemological
Development(3
co Beliefs 3 Associated With the Positionl shyVgt rI)
1 rI) ~
~ -shy
Instruction That C
Matches~
shyshy Epistemological Vgt ngt Stage 0 l- -lt Instruction That Vgt Encourages c shy Movement to a ~ Higher Stage
Earlier Positions
r 0 ~ ~
T 4~ r r r ~
TABLI 1
Perrys StagesPositions of Epistemological Reasoning and Related Instructional Strategies
-
Dualism Multiplicity Relativism
Knowledge is cer- Some questions have I Knowledge is interpreted tam (right or wrong) no certain answers in and unambiquous these cases knowledge
I in context distinguishing better from worse answers
and truth are subjec- Irequires selecting theories Authorities (teachers) live so everyones opinshy Ih b jt he quPtiouknow The Truth ion is eq~llyvalid
Activities that help Practice in comparshy Practice in creating students develop skill ing hypotheses and
comparing and select-
in memorization and theories acknowledgshy ing preferable theoshyrecall mnemonics etc ing all possibilities retical models
in exoert behaviors
Exposure to lems with more than in different disciplines one right answer andl to conduct research or more than one construct theories approach to a solution and make decisions
RanCJe of Typical School Senior
Range of Gifted High School Senior
~ ~ I g C shy ~ n ~ -5 ~ ~ ~ ~ shy
~- ~ ~r r rshy - shyr r l
~ r- r
2-~ r- shy shy
~
r r
I CommitmentDialectic
Knowledge methods are and uncertain Choices require analysis and values
Later Positions
n Z 0 l ln 0r
~ shy~
N
( raquo shyraquo CI J
0
13 DESIGNED TO FIT
found with middle school srudenrs (Schommer-Aikins Duell amp 11l[ter 2005) Studenrs at lower levels may have trouble correcring misconceptions and draw
only fact-based information from inquiry-oriented environments (Ryan ] 984) Epistemological Jtanee aJectJ ildvanced academic performance Students with
more advanced belief have an easier time building logical arguments (Weinstock
Kellman amp Tabak 2(04) they tend to choose thinking strategies that Slipport
deep rather than surface learning (Cano 2005 Zhang amp Watkins 2(01) Kitchshy
enet (1983) also suggested that students selectioll of meracognirive strategies can
be affected by their epis((mologicai beliefs Support for this idea comes from a study by Ruban and Reis (2006) who found that high-achieving students tended
to select cnhancemem oriented learning strategies while lower achieving srudents
selected survival oriented strategies
Illstruction can encourage )WIemem to higber epistemological elcTelChers
can affecr changes in students epistemological thinking through intentionally
structllred learning experiences (Kloss 1094 Kronholm 1993l Strategies recomshy
mended to dCc1op epistemological thinking include using ill-structured problems
and instructional straregics thar allow srudenrs to examine their assumptions anashy
lyze data that present different conHicting perspectiyes and then make decisions
(King amp Kitchener 20(4) Devoting some time to direct instruction about tbe
narure of the discipline helps develop higher levels of reasoning (Bdl 20(4) vhmltltch bet1 iecn instructiol t7 lid epistemoogiCtl Itllnee (pnspect i IJt) colltributes
to jruurrltiol[ (wd disillusiolllJlflll Cedric didnt respond well when Ms Marrin
started a f1Cr-based lecture Over time he will simply decide that school is trivial
or worse meaningless Had Ms 1artin staned imtead with a discllssion of the
violation of Native Americans sense of personhood Cedric wOllld have been
thrilled and Carl would hae been lost This kind of disparity creates barriers to
learning (Nelson 19()6 PelTY 1(70) --Jebel and Schommer-Aikins (2002) f()lnd
that a mismatch between insrruction and stance caused work avoidance among
some high school phYsics students Lovell and lunnefY (2004) ltJUnd that srudents
even found small-group work Illore Itisfing when they Vere grouped according
to sranct (perspecrhc)
Giftrd tlldCIIpound1 tmel to tlJead iii epistemgical dezclopllllllt Stll(iiLs of adoshylescents doculllent that cpistemological belicts mature in a pndioablc dcvelopshy
mental sequcnce (Cano 200) Zhang amp latk ins 2(01) In parallcl to formal
operational reasoning gifred rdoiesccl1t move through episremologicli stges in
the same sequence (Ihomas 2()08) but tend to be a stage or rwo ahead of orlIer
rhe same age (Arlin amp LCirr Il))X Goldberger 1981 Schollll11er I Dunnell
1997 ~n1Omas) 2008 Wilkinsoll I Iaxwcll 1991 iilkinsoll amp Schw~lrtz 19X-1
Lible 1 provides a general seme of the distribution of senior year studcm baSell on existing research
Adult experts tend to holt IlrlzlIIeal epi)tllIIologimlliClls -Ihc epistcl11ojogicri
framework also provides a UHl1lCtiOIl to anuther aspect of experrisc -CIO the
disciplines the behaviors and l([irlllk associared with mature episrel11ologv arc
A Guide to Recommended Practices
[
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
gt ~ ~--------------
GALLAGHER14
considered essential for advanced authentic work (Buehl amp Alexander 2005 Felder 1997 Henderson 1995 Kloss 1994 Muis 20(4)
Connections With G~fted Education Evidence that gifted students tend ro
be somewhat ahead of their age-mates in epistemological development follows
naturally from the data on formal operations reponed above However other
inreresting connections bring this theon into cohesion with existing knowledge
of giftltd students for example there is some indication that people who prlttCr
Intuition on the Jhers-Briggs Type Inventory tend [() have higher epistemologishy
cal stances (Zhang 199()) Cifted rudents overwhelmingly report this prdlrenCl
(Sak 2004) and the connecrion gives further evidencc that giftcd students will
respond best to open-ended inquiry-oriented learning environments Similarly
it explains gifted adolescents positive response to mentOr relationships Like
all adolescents gifted reenagers want to see similarities bcrween themselves and
others in mentors they find kindred spirits who think abour ideas from similar
frames of mind
Most exciting perhaps is the COil necrion between epistell1oosY md expertise
Not only do gifted students show earlv potential to achieve the expens high levels
of reasoning bur also epistell1ologicalll10deis provide a guide to he p explain how [() move all students closer to authentic higher order reasoning Callagher (l99X) suggested that models slIch as these would make effecdve frameworks for designing
high school curriculum providing an organic model for differentiation Based on
his study of adolescent epistelllological beliefs Cano (200raquo) concurred
it is necessary to take into account nor only students previous knowlshy
edge and learning strategies bur also their learning approaches and
epistemological beliefs Secondlv wc should work directly to try to
enhance [he depth of learning approaches and the complexity of episshy
temological belid~ as way of improving academic achievemenc (p 217)
Finally this framework reinforces the notion that the outcomes tt)r ignorshy
ing srudents beliefs are grave Srudents have trouble accepting the relevance of
instrtlLtion that is out of sync with their stag (Perr- ]970) a finding that is
consonant with the well-established knowledge that gifred adolescents reject munshy
dane repetitive curriculum hlrrher gifted students operating at higher levels than
other students find instrllction orienred towards the majorit uninspiring and
communicate their feelings through underachievement More sltriollsly perhaps
Nelson (1989) cautioned that excessive time spent in low-lenl curriculum actively
builds a wall of habit that blocks the path to higher level reasoning Even rapid
acceleration can havc this d~magillg eftect ifstudenrs are onlv accelerated into nev
low-level content It) prmidl a climl[e read for higher order thinking educators
must present COIltCIH that is accelerated vertically as well as horizomalh-
CI [
tCl ~I
1
lhe IS 110 i I
and fUc
hest n~II
15
bull - r
~ shy
~
~n( )1shy
()f ut I
l1UI1shy
[hm
inti
lpid
DLltiCNEl) TO m
Complete Coherence Evidence-Based Recommendations for
Differentiation in Secondary School
Each of the perspecrivcs considercc1 in this rationale is championed h differshy
ent researchers operating from different paradigms and using differenr research
techniques Even so their respectin findings arc remarkably similar
1 Gifted adolescents nced exposure [0 ~l larger quanrity of coment that
the find dnllenging Beginning at least in middle schooL abstract conshy
tenr should he a srandard part of their curriculum I he importlnle of developing a plenriful high-quality wcll of information i essLlHial as
it is a precursor to using higher order thinking ll1etJcognitivc thinking
and abstract thinking Cifted students will lot adequJtek develop their
thinking skills without this knowledge base 2 A quality knowledge bZlse is neCssary hilt notutticilmiddotllt ItH developing
thinking skilk Ciftecl studenrs 1lUt be presented with Ierning experishy
ences that require them to engage their critical thinking skills and metlshy
cognitive skills If they do not find their assignments challenging their
brains willilot engage their higher order functions T()gether content and
strategv med along ith metacognition predict academic perf()[mltlnce
making the simultalleous devdopmenr of these three paramount
3 Cifted students show earl~ promise t()r deydoping expertise Capitalizi ng
on that earlv promise requires instruction where stlldems Gl1 practice the
qualities of expcrtbe including open-ended imtruction inquiry-based
instruction problcm-oriented instrucrion field experiences and menrorshy
ships all cCl1[ercd 011 high-qualitv disciplinarv or imcrdisciplinary content
Cifted srudents arc most lihk to sec this instruction as relevant and draw
maximum value hom it
4 Expertisc requircs more thall contLflt and skill habits of mind ~llld
~llhaI1C1d epistemological re~lsoning also arc essentiaL If we aspirc for gifted students-~or for allY s(Udel1l~--to hecome creative productive leadshy
ers in their chosen field curriculutH ~lJld instruction should he selected to
develop these simultaneoush- and include exposure to the philosophies
and (thics of thc disciplines
The absence of a qualin- differerlliated secondary progrll11 flH gifted students
is not a neutral position it is 1 choice that will result in deficit skill dCeopmcnt
and student apathy At worr it ill result in the disillusionment some of the
best minds in the country
A Guide to Recommended Practices
i
GALLAGHER16
References
Arlin P K amp Levin L (1998) A deelopmenta perspc((ic on giftedness
HeetlrcIoltnlld I )4~~5i(1 Baxter Jvlagolda Jvl B (J 987) Comparing open-ended inteljcs lnd standardized mea- Hair
sun of inrelieefUal development ollilla Strfmt PCIJoiJle 28 443~44S -i
BdL E (2004) Promoring StUdUHS argumenr consrrncriOll and collahorativc debate in thc Hell science classfl)om rn ~ 1 C Linn E A Davis amp P Bell (Eds J Imimlt J1lrOltrrIOtS h~middot
seimC IIiCilioll (pp 11 i-145) lal11ah 1 Lawrence Erlballl11
rkrningcr V amp Yates C (J (95) Formal operational thought in rhe gifted A postshy H(ln~
Piagetian pnspecriC Hu(ti (nilli I) 220~224 HUN
Rirnn B L (l991 Formal operHional nlsolling Illodes Predictors of critical thinking
abilit ies alld grade assigned Iw reacher in sciencc and nlarhemltltics il[ student in
grades nine rhrough [tke Ollljli ill Sciei( 28 2()-2~4 InhclcL
Buehl 1 amp Alnlnder P (2001) lorivarion and pnr~HlllaJl(e ditferemes in srudelJ[
dOllllin-specific epiSrllllUI()~illt11 bel iet profiles ilIHlIll FdllClitiolfll NCilllrchOII1i
middoti2 (N-- - 2(
ClIlO I (200i) Lpistcl]ologicai bclid~ IJlld a[lproaches to Icllning Ih~ir through lh secol1dan chool wd their influcncc Oil lCademic pn~lrn1alKe Bllti_f lotmil
tdlildtiOllit -) 205- 221 Kanl
ClIl 1 amp Alexander I (I )()6) Xhere giftd children do 1Ild do nO[ cxcel on llleracogshy
n irin lasb Noel) NcriCiI 18 12lt 1( 1)
Cherne L 11 VinrCl J amp Chlrnc j1 l (200i) NucleH problem s()h-ln~ Kanl
elise stUlh of expert-I1Oicl differences hllliSlletoll fI(the iVdmtI of
Seillle w 1-- hi 11 T H (lascL R amp iarr 1 J (itk) (19HHl Ihc Itttn If
NJ Lawrence Erlbaulll King I
CsiksCIHIll ihali 1 1 Ib rJundt K amp Whakn S ( 1 )94) ]tIIIItc tieillgcn 11( mou of I 1 JifCCC-S Iiiirifllllln Bmrou ( PrlmiddotSS ~
[lidson I L amp I I tJ)Hj)lh roll ofimighr in ilwlIeuual ~ifredncs King l
(dial Child (jlltrtal ]8 is-hi dc Urnl 1 amp lLlll~jl 1 11()()iIlhlmiddot riariollshil hcmlln 1biliriLs and slt1rshy
regllbrld Ic~lrning l ilkncc ti) imcraLTiolb with leIck-mil sdt~lomcpt Ild gender
iglllbiit) lirlI ( 2() 1 ) S
Felder R (19~J 1 kCl our s1Udenrs Dac hrrlLl and Ruhcllo ChtlJiicd KItin
Fdll(iltOi31 10(- j() d Cllb~hcr J l-Llrrallilll C ( 0 (olcn1lt1ll ~1 R (J 9F) UlilIkllgc or boredom Ciftld Ii
tlldIHS ics on rhir ((Pi1 NUiCli 19 132~l(1 iI
Callagher S A (l)lt)H 11 he ((lld 10 ulrinl rhinking I he scheille lilt llleH1in~ht KIo I
ditttTcnriation ii Hill(IiII 8li iL)) 12-20 ic Calb~her S 1 (2()()()1 l rhmiddot to slience expcrtiscmiddot In F Dixon amp S Kronl](I
0100[1 ( l IitI)i u (lllllIO1 [PI 1()~middot+6(J) I1U) TX (n
Irufroc k Prns larson 1
CipsoJ] 1 brdulll 1 0 Ic1111ll L t 19S)1 Rcll(ollhil hC[Cll1 t(lrmal-opltTniullll dlOughr and ttllhclrud ditkulrie in geflLtiS problem IUIilidl ofRlsldJ(f ill --I J gt~
Slilll( ( S 1 1--S2 I Loell (
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
17 DESIGNED TO fiT
ul
IX
Gorodetsky 1 amp Klavir R (2003) What can we learn from how giftedaverage pupils
describe their processes of problem solving) Learning amp Instruction 13 305-326 Grabner R Neubauer A amp Srern E (2006) Superior performance and neural efficiencv
Ihe impact of intelligence and expertise Brain Research Bulletin 69 422-439 Haicr R J JUl1g R E Yeo R A Head K amp Alkire M r (200t) Srrllcrural brain
variHion and general inrelligence Netlroimage J L 425-435 Henderson S (J 995) Vh do I hae ro be here) The Advanced Placement srudelH in
firs(~vear composition Problems and isslles in cognitive development journal ondar) Gifted EduCtlri(Jl 7 )24-532
Hong L (19)9) Swdying the mind of rhe gifted ROfper Relieu 21 244-2)2 Hurst R amp Milkenr 11 (1996) Facilitaring successful prediccion problem gt(living in
biology through application ofskill theor jOllnJal ill Scimce ) 541-)52
Inhclder fl amp Piager j (19)8) the cililrflIor1I IlrO-fi((
Jew York Basic fI()oks
Jarvin L amp Subomik R (2006) Understanding elitc taient ill acadcmil domaim A
dcvclopmcl1(al ttajccwn from hasic ahilities O scholarlv producrivitvcmisfr In E A Dixon amp S 1 Moon (Eek) thc hillidbook (pp205-220) vhco TX Prufrock Press
Kancsky L (1)92) Gifred children and thc learning process Imights on both tlom rhe
rcsearch III E Miinks amp Xi Peters (Eds) J(tlmr r1( (pp 1))middot161) Asscn
Ihe 0lctherlands Van CorClUll
Kanevsky L amp KeighlcvL (2003) 1~) produce or nor ro produce understanding hOi dum and the honor in umkrlchkl111cnr RCIitll26 2()2R
Kauflll]n J C Gentile C r amp Bllf J (200)) Do gifted sflllknr writers and crec)(ive
writing experts raIL lTlcni in till same Child QlltlltCrl 4) 2()O-265 King P v1 amp Kitchener K S (1)94) jll(zr1II IllI
flild illtcllltfli ill flrocsCm fllld (lIn San
Francisco Josse~ Bass
King l 1 amp Kitchencr K S (2004) Iefieltivc judgllllm Ihcorv and research on thl
dtveioplllelH ()f pircmic assllmptions through adulrhood Fdilolfiolltll
YJ(I) )-lR
Kitchener K S (1 )HI) Cogllition Il1ctalugnirioll and episttmic cognition A rhrcltlevel
model of cognitivc pnllc fl1I11II11I )11 dOjJ 1IItl1 I 6 222~252 Klein J T (I ))3) Blurring CLIcking mel crossing Permcation and thc fracturing of
discipline In E lesscr-DlidO D R ShUlllV amp D J Shan (Eds) (Pl 1 Hi-21 I) Charlnwsdle Uniersin
of Virginia Press
Kloss R J (19)4) nudge is hest Helping srudems throllgh rhe Iern schellll of intll
Iccruat Jeel0pllhnr I] I i 1-1 lH
Kronholm M 1 (19J) l Ihe i mp)ct of dCIdnpmenral instruction on rcHen ill iudgmellL
RCIieU ofHigber ErlIldtillll I i 1))-middot2)) Larson R V amp Richmk 1 11 1 L)J 1 ugusr) Boredom in (hi middle scilll() I
ears Blaming schoolgt erus gtIamitlg mdenrs 1l11encdll jOIiJIiI OjliJI(I[JOII 9)
418-44) Lmell C X amp 0unnen j i 2()()i i Tesling the adulr dCelopme1( I()CI of [lahel
hvpothesis HOI1l0gillCOll hmiddot lln position mllaboldtile learning groups and grcldu
ate student sarisfanion tllrtr 11 IY) 1)0
A Guide to Recommended Practices
L GtgtLlA(HER18
Ludlow B L amp Voodrum D T (1)82) Problem-sohing and aerag~
Icarners on a multiple discrimination task (ild
Matthews D amp lkLwghlin T 1)94) EHects otleHIlr-cclHcln acthitics on
achievement and students preterences in [So hiih 5c11Ol lLtrSes HI(tPWdl
fllld AOo)li -8 28)-286 ivlcDonJkl J (I )Kl) Cogniric dcnlopmenr Jnd the rlUdU or geometric contcllr
Rlslrd ill f(ltbcJlldti f((cilwm 20 -11-)4
vlontlgue 1 (19() 1 J Cihnl and Icnning diabkd gifrcd smdllls lise of knowledge and
usc of mrriHIllHicli and prohlem sohing srrarcgic I I(uuioll oftII
11 Y))-+II
middotluis K (2004) ierson(rl cpisrcmologv and marhcmuics - critical rcic and smhesis
of research RcIlli lifdll(lIli()Ii Retii -1 31--3-- Neher H amp Scholllnllr-middotikim 1 (20021 Sclf-regubted ilIKC with hiohl
gitted students l11e rok of cogn it i l l110t i UiOll] L pist cillologicd md cm [ron l1](llshy
[11 (1liahle linif Stili lin 3( I i iC)_-I
Nelson C E (I )8)) Skcwered on th unicorns horn 111lt iluion or the rr(lckotf between content and LTitk1 thinking in the lcaching otsliLllcC [n L X row (Edi
(nth II iii hI j(ltIlaquo rpp 17_-) (lshingrotl DC ]11[onll
Scimee (ltrehers AsOl iou ion
Nelson c E (1 )9() Studellt dicrsir rCl]uircs ditknm appro(lLhcs to collqc tcaciling
Cln in math llld sckncc iIIlT(dl Fiehtllltl(ri S((illhl -10 1(1)-1)
Niaz L amp Robinson Xi (1 j)2) IW1l algllrithmic mode [(l Ol1ccprur1 gCs[1lt in
1Il1lkrstanding rill blhavior of gibe An cpiSlclllOiogic11 pcrspccric Rt(Igt ii)(fshy
IIII 0 ic(bliologiCd hhl(iltiOi J(J )5-(H
Ilttry V ( II (I JeD) hJlII ojilferlld tllirl erb(lt r(ICOPJltJ iii tilt ieiln J Idllltll NeW York Holt Rinehart amp iINon
Plucker J A amp kInrire J (1 l9()) lldel11il sllnilbilin ill high-pOIClHill middle school StlldllltS Cifra (hlld I() --1middot1
Rahinmviu 0 CIar R (llJH)) Cq rulturc Ilnd proces in high U)11Pl lent plrr()rmOlllcmiddot In I D Horcmill 0 1 OBrkn ([k) 111 1111r1Ii1fmte4
11 perpeelIlc (PI -)-)8) ahjn~[oil DC rmCIIlCn ycltologkJI
-soc ia[i 0 n
RohimoJl amp Clinkcnbeard l R (1 ))8) Clftcdncss An cxccprlonaiirv examined
AIIlliltl1 RIIicll j) 11- 151
Ruh1I1 L amp RcI S ((()() Pancrn ohdi~rcglliatiotl jl(men of strHcS
lISC 11llOllg I[)v-Khiing mel high-lchicing univnsin sludlHs ROi lt11leu 8 14K-I
Rv(m 1 (I )k+) loniwring [Xl (ol1lprci1lnsion Inciiidud dirkrcllns in
ul gttandards JOIIiIId
SaL U (2004) A npls ()fhiftd adobccnrsoilld
Schummll 1 (I ))l 11 lOllccprualilllriol1 O(CpiSlcllloiogical hdicl~ and thcir
role 011 kamint In R (lrtlCr ( i A Alexander (Lds) dOllIiX( lid ilitJlC
(iOIl Itit tCXI 2i--fOI liillbJc 1 LlTClllC Erlblllll1
Scitorn1l1er 1 amp DUIlIlLil l 1Jrl Epistcmologicti bdd~ or littcd high chuol
studcllls RalIi 19 1-middot1 )(
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
SChOlllll1(
enul
J7I Shieci
d ir )l)-
Shore II
chilei JlIT
Shore H
dllf
i( ) Sowell
1()
i
Span I
Stcinc I
a rmiddot fl]
SrlillC1 i
In Srcrnh~l
L f Slnnh_
(
Suhotl1~
fhollLh
ch
11lt 111 __
~ ~ tcshy
ri
choo
DESICNED FiT
Schommer-AikinsL Duell 0 K amp Hurter R (2005) Epistemological mathshy
emarical probkm-solving beliefs and academic of middle school students
Ihe 105289-304 Shieer S amp ]1aker C J 199-) Enrichment and acceleration An meniew 1I1d new
directions In ~ Colangelo amp C Davis Haildboo edllcation 99-110) Boston Allm amp Bacon
Shore B M (2000) ktacognitiol1 and Hexibilitmiddot differences in how gifted
children think In R C Friedman amp B 1 Shore (Elk) rllllts ulljf)dillg CogshylIitioli and dlleopllllt 16--1Sn vrashil1gton DC American PsChological
Association
Shore B 1 amp Irving J (200j) Inquirv as a Il(dagogicallink hetween expnie lnc
giftedness111e lbili( lI1d inquin resc1ch group at 1cCili Lnhmiddotcrir
fwd tofld IlIteliirUllilidl O( 1)5-40
Shore B fL amp Lazar 1 (1996) differences in time alltlcatiol1 Irhlc-m
-8 11411-S49
Sowell L R 1cters()ll B S lhol11pon P 1 e1cuIllLmiddot S [ Il~nklt nill L amp lc)gl A V (2003l bpping cortical Cross rhe human lit~ pan MUIII
iVmoicillIr( () 309-51 i
Span )1 amp Oertool11-COrSIll iL R (19H6) Informatioll ng hmiddot intellectual
pupils sullillg Illarhcmuical prohlems Frill(tlliolldl Stil 1 Alarfeillrltio -
273-291 SteineL H H amp Carr 1 12(05) C
more preci undersundinf of Hrclgr RIIiCli 15 21)-21
denmiddotlopl11lnt in children Toward
di fferenccs ill i mel Iigencl Ldi(tltlOlIr
Stcimmiddotr H H amp Clrr 1 (200() 1 r(ldolIIl11t oproJIeil -ollilI Iii gijicrl lllirl Ilmgl~iiil) (fidllll lc(rr(J liml d(fo(illiilt to edliCtiolliI
I-bllppauge lY Ioa Science
Srnnbcrg R J (Ed) (191-12) flIIrll)(o ahliililll illllllgolec ~e York Cambridge
Unlnsir Press
StLrnberg RI (2()()~ L hroJd ie or il1telligencefllc thl(l~ of sllcccssful
COllilltilig lotrildmiddot Jritti(1 illlt R(tllc 55 15)-1 i-l
Sllbotnik R F (2()(Ul doicC1[ pathway to lmll1LIllC ill seicnlL Lcsom irom the
music COIlSLratoIY III P CLTmch- amp L ledcrlllltln (hisl SUOi([ (rII(lItioll [tllII
rnmitllloi( i1Hd pllblli 2)i-502) Burke lOS Pre
lhonl1sI- (200S) RCiing and
ethnicity Il()n~ gifted high SdlOUI sllIdcJl(
Wluing 1 (1989) Logical IllCe-sln to mlkc line graphs j(llnldl itl middotcima J( 3-1-3 -q
Veins[Ock 1 )culllan Y amp iaiuk 1 2()) I) liing thc point or [hL nomh
of wdcllts to icklltit Ltliaiouo argumiddot I11cnts )( 1) -94
Wilkinson V K amp 1)lt)1 i Ih influencc of collegc stmle-nt
logical Ull clecrlLi to h- i 11 ~ prO(SL~ ([Ier rcb iN UJ~Ji()
Vilkinsoll X K amp Sdmart l II I 9fCllhc oricllLltioll I gittLd
adolcsccnrs 11 tL (d 11[ model Reports hJ r6-l)-k
Young E (2001 hyJun(i rlh l)uildillg blocks ()tlir~ fJ COlriu j(gt--+H
A Guide to Recommended Practices
19
GALLAGHER20
Yurgelun-1()dd D A amp Kilgore X D (2006) harmiddotmiddotre8ted acridt in the prefrontal
cortex increases with age during adolescence A preliminary f1RI study Neuroscience Lmer406194-19()
Zhang L F (J 999) Furrher cross-cultural validation of rill theory of menul self-governshymenr journal 133 16)-1)1
Zhang L F amp atkins D (200 II Cognitivc dcvcloplllll1t llld stUdcnt approaches to
learning An investigation ofPerns theor~ vith Clullcse and US uniersitv students Higher EduCfltiol1 41239-2(1
SUSANr
We
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
DtSIGNED TO FIT 9
~-~I~Jl~
-itd
~~l
lLmiddot [
- 1HJ
tlcd
ci[lmiddotd
ci picshy
cr tilar
I()11 to
~ cxanshy l)-())
lt lLLms
some show inferior performance among gifted youth (Dresel amp Haugwitz 2005
Ludlow amp Woodrum 1982) At first glance these findings seem counrerintuitive Why wouldnt gifted stushy
dents show the same advantage in metacognition that they have in learning content
and using thinking skills Carr and Alexander (1996) presenred three plausible
explanations First the tasks llsed in metacognitive research especially research on
near transfer may be so easy that gifted srudenrs do well without monitoring their
performance 111is would explain vhy gifted students are similar to their peers in
their use of metacognitive skills on near transfer tasks but consistently perform betshy
ter on far transfer tasks Far transfer tasks offer a greater challenge requiring gifted
smdems to engage in sdf-monitoring Drescl and Haugwitz (200)) conducted a
classroom-based study that reintorces this notion finding that gifted students did
nO[ use self-regulating behavior if thev thought an assignment was easy Based on
their study they concluded the finding that students with high abilities use
strategies less frequentlv in regular school lessons can be seen as an indication that
their learning environment is inadequately low (p I )) In order ro provide
gifced students with the same amount of practice in self-regulation as average stushy
dems they must work as frequently with tasks the find challenging-I11e alternashy
tive is to leave these skills undeveloped underdeveloped or poorly ckvcloped
Second the relationship between metacognition and IQ lllay have a threshshy
old dlCct lQ may predict skilled LIse of metacognition up to a point Once the
threshold is crossed I(~ docs not guarantee that children will acquire or usc
cognitive skills such as Illcracognitioll believed to promote high achievement
1l1ese cognitie kills appear to deeop instead our ofel11crging expertise (Carr
amp Alexander 19W) p 214) 111 iId the generic conrent-free nature of research tasks may be both u nrcal istic
and unlikelv to [eltal gifted performance difFerences Research Oil expert perforshy
mance suggests that cognitivc monitoring realh is on necessary after thc student
develops I deep and signif1cam body of discipline-based coment (Chi Glaser amp Em 19RR Rabinowitz amp Glaser 19Wi)
In SLIm gifted students have accts) to seWregulatory lwhaviors but lise them
inconsistenrh- Llltctive self-regulation is relatcd both to ltlcademic success and to
adlllt expert percml) 111 cO Ensuring that gifted students have adequate practice
wirh a wide range of metltlcognitivc skills requires
bull constanr exposure ro chaltnging Cllmcnr
bull learn j ng tasks slIfficicn tk d iftlcul r to requi re sOl f-regulation 1l1el bull immersion in disciplinan-hased CO I1(C 11(
EjJfrtis( and 1migh r i nw expert performance prmides ] guideshy
post trll planning programs ttlr gifred adolescenrs because we aspire for Ihll11 ro become experts or innomiddotlt1wrs in their chosen field Research filldings conrinul ro
strengthen the rit between gifrlmiddotd srudenrs thought processes and rhar of domainshy
specitlc expertS (Gorodetsb 0 -hlir 2003 Klll till an Genrile amp Bacr 200) Shore 2(00) Common charlc-rnirics ~llreadv discllssed include rapid acquisirion
A Guide to Recommended Practices
GALLAGHER10
of content skill and flexibility in critical thinking and self-regulation Gifted srudenrs seem to intuitively have some expert-like skills (Kaufman er ai 2005) while others are only acquired through training (Cherney et ai 2005)
Reviewing the literature on expertise Carr and Alexander (1996) pointed our
that it more than skill and ability to be an expert Although experts need sufficient general ability (IQ) to perf()fm at a high level other such as task
commitmenr a sttOng knowledge and social suppOrt are more important tor developing expertise and promoting achievement through expertise (p 214) Ihe list of teguiremenrs for expertise also includes perspective forward problem solving persistence risk taking and tacit knowledge professional language and behaviors Jarvin amp Sllbornik 2006 Shore 2000 Sternberg 2(03) Expershy
tise in this larger sense can be devcoped using curriculum and instruction
emphasize problem solving open-ended questions construction ofideas multiple
perspectives and exposure to disciplinary experts (Gallagher 2006 Shore amp Irving
2005 Sternberg 2003 Sllbornik 2003) [11 sum gifted students cognitivl characteristics parallel those of adult lxperts
Ensuring thar gifted srudlnts continue to develop lxperr-like skills requires
bull exposure to explicit and tacit dbciplinary knowledge bull time to engage in flexibll thinking with disciplinary and interdisciplinary
content
bull curriculum and instruction thar incorporate inquiry cOl1ceptuallearning and authentic conrexts and
bull opportunities f(lI problem solving and mentorships
The Role of Student Perspective Epistemology
Still missing is perhaps t11l most importanr rlCror abollt the education ofgifred adole~cellts Etons to design effective programs and promote new kinds of practice will be for naught if thc srudems themselves do not recognize the significance or
valuc in (he tasks assigned [ he t(JrI11 of perspecrivl in question is tpistemgy ones abo lit rhe nature
of knowledge Perry (1 presel1[ed a developmental scheme that made direct
and pragmatic application [0 the classroom tor it described both how students
views of knowledge change Ocr time and also the powerful eteCt ditering views
have in the classroom Perrys scheme presents nine distincr positions that can be collapsed into four broad suges as sUlllmarized by Gallagher (2006)
Dualism Marked by a black-and-white perspective srudents at rhis sragl
believe aillegirimate questions have certain anSWlrs So-called questions without answers are jmt nOl1seme questions pointless
Multiplicity Stlldents acknowledge that there arc a kw unanswered
questions hut hdiCL dur in the absence of an ltlnswer all opinions on the matter are egualk alid
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Student
III
kl(
[h
hu [he ~J
() r
lV ~ rk Illmiddot
I I ~
id
11
kJ
11 DESIGNED TO FIT
middot dti t
1 __1
tl
n~
u~url
- l i rlcl
cLnt~
~ leWS
-1-1 be
lll1
Contextual Relativism Unanswered questions are investigated using the
tools provided by each discipline each discipline approaches questions in a different wav Certain amwers are unlikely bur a best ansver can
be achieved using the proper rools
CommitmentDialectic Theories are used [() set directions for imporshy
cam questions most of which have no right or wrong answers Gaining understanding requires building upon the possibilities presented by dara as interpreted by a consciously selected point ofview bur with willingness
to change perspective if rhe need arises (p 436)
l~lble 1 presents the f(lUr stages aligned with the beliefs about learning that Iecomshy
pany each stage For a more concrete example comider Carl and Cedric two students waitshy
ing for class to begin Carl believes rlwt knowledge means fH-rS and being knowledgeable means remembering lots of bets Cedric 011 the other band
thinks that knowledge is the abilitv to combine bcts to create ideas For Cedric
being knowledgeable isnt aboll[ the numher of ElCts he knows its ahout how the [Kts can form and rd()fIll to create diffltrent ideas Their teacher Ms Morshy
gan starts her lecture on the Trail oflCars f()(using on the sequence of even ts
detailing what who and when Carl picks up his pen and starts studiously takshying notes Cedric slumps down in his desk grumbling [lCtoids-lbe two boys
hear the same lccrure bom the same teacher but their ditterent belids abour
knowledge afftC[ bow willing they are to accept the inf()rmation as meaningful or valid
A numher ofrheories nmv artempt to describe aspects ofepistel11ological develshyopment (Baxter 1agolda 1987 King amp Kitchener 1994 Schommer 1994) Each theory describes sequen tiaL developmentalmovemenr from a low or naive stance in which knowledge is equated with flctllal inr()Jmation and memorization to
a high or mature stance in which bets are used ro build theories from a
consciollsly selected point ofview but with willingness w change perspective if the need arises (C~lllagher 2006 p 43(1) In the example above Carl holds a navc
stallce and thu~ is happy to gather up a list of taCtS from the lecture Cedrics stance
is more mature and he wishes the flcts had been embedded in more meaningful ideas
Je ComprelJemizie Irnptlct (1Fpitemgy At one level the impact of Carls
and Cedrics differing heliefs is immediately apparent Students are not like ro learn what the do 110 helilVl to be Illeaningfu-or at least they wont learn it
t()r long After two decades of reselrch into the effeC( of epistemology on karning
it is clear that the impact extends hevond whether students like whl( thl learn to
a number of other important ilCldll1lic Ol[COll1es dCllciemil ilcJitlJcmcnt Using a structural equation
analysis Cano (2005) f()ulld that high school students epistemological stance had
both direct and indirect effects 011 academic achievement Similar results have been
A Guide to Recommended Practices
Stages of Epistemological
Development(3
co Beliefs 3 Associated With the Positionl shyVgt rI)
1 rI) ~
~ -shy
Instruction That C
Matches~
shyshy Epistemological Vgt ngt Stage 0 l- -lt Instruction That Vgt Encourages c shy Movement to a ~ Higher Stage
Earlier Positions
r 0 ~ ~
T 4~ r r r ~
TABLI 1
Perrys StagesPositions of Epistemological Reasoning and Related Instructional Strategies
-
Dualism Multiplicity Relativism
Knowledge is cer- Some questions have I Knowledge is interpreted tam (right or wrong) no certain answers in and unambiquous these cases knowledge
I in context distinguishing better from worse answers
and truth are subjec- Irequires selecting theories Authorities (teachers) live so everyones opinshy Ih b jt he quPtiouknow The Truth ion is eq~llyvalid
Activities that help Practice in comparshy Practice in creating students develop skill ing hypotheses and
comparing and select-
in memorization and theories acknowledgshy ing preferable theoshyrecall mnemonics etc ing all possibilities retical models
in exoert behaviors
Exposure to lems with more than in different disciplines one right answer andl to conduct research or more than one construct theories approach to a solution and make decisions
RanCJe of Typical School Senior
Range of Gifted High School Senior
~ ~ I g C shy ~ n ~ -5 ~ ~ ~ ~ shy
~- ~ ~r r rshy - shyr r l
~ r- r
2-~ r- shy shy
~
r r
I CommitmentDialectic
Knowledge methods are and uncertain Choices require analysis and values
Later Positions
n Z 0 l ln 0r
~ shy~
N
( raquo shyraquo CI J
0
13 DESIGNED TO FIT
found with middle school srudenrs (Schommer-Aikins Duell amp 11l[ter 2005) Studenrs at lower levels may have trouble correcring misconceptions and draw
only fact-based information from inquiry-oriented environments (Ryan ] 984) Epistemological Jtanee aJectJ ildvanced academic performance Students with
more advanced belief have an easier time building logical arguments (Weinstock
Kellman amp Tabak 2(04) they tend to choose thinking strategies that Slipport
deep rather than surface learning (Cano 2005 Zhang amp Watkins 2(01) Kitchshy
enet (1983) also suggested that students selectioll of meracognirive strategies can
be affected by their epis((mologicai beliefs Support for this idea comes from a study by Ruban and Reis (2006) who found that high-achieving students tended
to select cnhancemem oriented learning strategies while lower achieving srudents
selected survival oriented strategies
Illstruction can encourage )WIemem to higber epistemological elcTelChers
can affecr changes in students epistemological thinking through intentionally
structllred learning experiences (Kloss 1094 Kronholm 1993l Strategies recomshy
mended to dCc1op epistemological thinking include using ill-structured problems
and instructional straregics thar allow srudenrs to examine their assumptions anashy
lyze data that present different conHicting perspectiyes and then make decisions
(King amp Kitchener 20(4) Devoting some time to direct instruction about tbe
narure of the discipline helps develop higher levels of reasoning (Bdl 20(4) vhmltltch bet1 iecn instructiol t7 lid epistemoogiCtl Itllnee (pnspect i IJt) colltributes
to jruurrltiol[ (wd disillusiolllJlflll Cedric didnt respond well when Ms Marrin
started a f1Cr-based lecture Over time he will simply decide that school is trivial
or worse meaningless Had Ms 1artin staned imtead with a discllssion of the
violation of Native Americans sense of personhood Cedric wOllld have been
thrilled and Carl would hae been lost This kind of disparity creates barriers to
learning (Nelson 19()6 PelTY 1(70) --Jebel and Schommer-Aikins (2002) f()lnd
that a mismatch between insrruction and stance caused work avoidance among
some high school phYsics students Lovell and lunnefY (2004) ltJUnd that srudents
even found small-group work Illore Itisfing when they Vere grouped according
to sranct (perspecrhc)
Giftrd tlldCIIpound1 tmel to tlJead iii epistemgical dezclopllllllt Stll(iiLs of adoshylescents doculllent that cpistemological belicts mature in a pndioablc dcvelopshy
mental sequcnce (Cano 200) Zhang amp latk ins 2(01) In parallcl to formal
operational reasoning gifred rdoiesccl1t move through episremologicli stges in
the same sequence (Ihomas 2()08) but tend to be a stage or rwo ahead of orlIer
rhe same age (Arlin amp LCirr Il))X Goldberger 1981 Schollll11er I Dunnell
1997 ~n1Omas) 2008 Wilkinsoll I Iaxwcll 1991 iilkinsoll amp Schw~lrtz 19X-1
Lible 1 provides a general seme of the distribution of senior year studcm baSell on existing research
Adult experts tend to holt IlrlzlIIeal epi)tllIIologimlliClls -Ihc epistcl11ojogicri
framework also provides a UHl1lCtiOIl to anuther aspect of experrisc -CIO the
disciplines the behaviors and l([irlllk associared with mature episrel11ologv arc
A Guide to Recommended Practices
[
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
gt ~ ~--------------
GALLAGHER14
considered essential for advanced authentic work (Buehl amp Alexander 2005 Felder 1997 Henderson 1995 Kloss 1994 Muis 20(4)
Connections With G~fted Education Evidence that gifted students tend ro
be somewhat ahead of their age-mates in epistemological development follows
naturally from the data on formal operations reponed above However other
inreresting connections bring this theon into cohesion with existing knowledge
of giftltd students for example there is some indication that people who prlttCr
Intuition on the Jhers-Briggs Type Inventory tend [() have higher epistemologishy
cal stances (Zhang 199()) Cifted rudents overwhelmingly report this prdlrenCl
(Sak 2004) and the connecrion gives further evidencc that giftcd students will
respond best to open-ended inquiry-oriented learning environments Similarly
it explains gifted adolescents positive response to mentOr relationships Like
all adolescents gifted reenagers want to see similarities bcrween themselves and
others in mentors they find kindred spirits who think abour ideas from similar
frames of mind
Most exciting perhaps is the COil necrion between epistell1oosY md expertise
Not only do gifted students show earlv potential to achieve the expens high levels
of reasoning bur also epistell1ologicalll10deis provide a guide to he p explain how [() move all students closer to authentic higher order reasoning Callagher (l99X) suggested that models slIch as these would make effecdve frameworks for designing
high school curriculum providing an organic model for differentiation Based on
his study of adolescent epistelllological beliefs Cano (200raquo) concurred
it is necessary to take into account nor only students previous knowlshy
edge and learning strategies bur also their learning approaches and
epistemological beliefs Secondlv wc should work directly to try to
enhance [he depth of learning approaches and the complexity of episshy
temological belid~ as way of improving academic achievemenc (p 217)
Finally this framework reinforces the notion that the outcomes tt)r ignorshy
ing srudents beliefs are grave Srudents have trouble accepting the relevance of
instrtlLtion that is out of sync with their stag (Perr- ]970) a finding that is
consonant with the well-established knowledge that gifred adolescents reject munshy
dane repetitive curriculum hlrrher gifted students operating at higher levels than
other students find instrllction orienred towards the majorit uninspiring and
communicate their feelings through underachievement More sltriollsly perhaps
Nelson (1989) cautioned that excessive time spent in low-lenl curriculum actively
builds a wall of habit that blocks the path to higher level reasoning Even rapid
acceleration can havc this d~magillg eftect ifstudenrs are onlv accelerated into nev
low-level content It) prmidl a climl[e read for higher order thinking educators
must present COIltCIH that is accelerated vertically as well as horizomalh-
CI [
tCl ~I
1
lhe IS 110 i I
and fUc
hest n~II
15
bull - r
~ shy
~
~n( )1shy
()f ut I
l1UI1shy
[hm
inti
lpid
DLltiCNEl) TO m
Complete Coherence Evidence-Based Recommendations for
Differentiation in Secondary School
Each of the perspecrivcs considercc1 in this rationale is championed h differshy
ent researchers operating from different paradigms and using differenr research
techniques Even so their respectin findings arc remarkably similar
1 Gifted adolescents nced exposure [0 ~l larger quanrity of coment that
the find dnllenging Beginning at least in middle schooL abstract conshy
tenr should he a srandard part of their curriculum I he importlnle of developing a plenriful high-quality wcll of information i essLlHial as
it is a precursor to using higher order thinking ll1etJcognitivc thinking
and abstract thinking Cifted students will lot adequJtek develop their
thinking skills without this knowledge base 2 A quality knowledge bZlse is neCssary hilt notutticilmiddotllt ItH developing
thinking skilk Ciftecl studenrs 1lUt be presented with Ierning experishy
ences that require them to engage their critical thinking skills and metlshy
cognitive skills If they do not find their assignments challenging their
brains willilot engage their higher order functions T()gether content and
strategv med along ith metacognition predict academic perf()[mltlnce
making the simultalleous devdopmenr of these three paramount
3 Cifted students show earl~ promise t()r deydoping expertise Capitalizi ng
on that earlv promise requires instruction where stlldems Gl1 practice the
qualities of expcrtbe including open-ended imtruction inquiry-based
instruction problcm-oriented instrucrion field experiences and menrorshy
ships all cCl1[ercd 011 high-qualitv disciplinarv or imcrdisciplinary content
Cifted srudents arc most lihk to sec this instruction as relevant and draw
maximum value hom it
4 Expertisc requircs more thall contLflt and skill habits of mind ~llld
~llhaI1C1d epistemological re~lsoning also arc essentiaL If we aspirc for gifted students-~or for allY s(Udel1l~--to hecome creative productive leadshy
ers in their chosen field curriculutH ~lJld instruction should he selected to
develop these simultaneoush- and include exposure to the philosophies
and (thics of thc disciplines
The absence of a qualin- differerlliated secondary progrll11 flH gifted students
is not a neutral position it is 1 choice that will result in deficit skill dCeopmcnt
and student apathy At worr it ill result in the disillusionment some of the
best minds in the country
A Guide to Recommended Practices
i
GALLAGHER16
References
Arlin P K amp Levin L (1998) A deelopmenta perspc((ic on giftedness
HeetlrcIoltnlld I )4~~5i(1 Baxter Jvlagolda Jvl B (J 987) Comparing open-ended inteljcs lnd standardized mea- Hair
sun of inrelieefUal development ollilla Strfmt PCIJoiJle 28 443~44S -i
BdL E (2004) Promoring StUdUHS argumenr consrrncriOll and collahorativc debate in thc Hell science classfl)om rn ~ 1 C Linn E A Davis amp P Bell (Eds J Imimlt J1lrOltrrIOtS h~middot
seimC IIiCilioll (pp 11 i-145) lal11ah 1 Lawrence Erlballl11
rkrningcr V amp Yates C (J (95) Formal operational thought in rhe gifted A postshy H(ln~
Piagetian pnspecriC Hu(ti (nilli I) 220~224 HUN
Rirnn B L (l991 Formal operHional nlsolling Illodes Predictors of critical thinking
abilit ies alld grade assigned Iw reacher in sciencc and nlarhemltltics il[ student in
grades nine rhrough [tke Ollljli ill Sciei( 28 2()-2~4 InhclcL
Buehl 1 amp Alnlnder P (2001) lorivarion and pnr~HlllaJl(e ditferemes in srudelJ[
dOllllin-specific epiSrllllUI()~illt11 bel iet profiles ilIHlIll FdllClitiolfll NCilllrchOII1i
middoti2 (N-- - 2(
ClIlO I (200i) Lpistcl]ologicai bclid~ IJlld a[lproaches to Icllning Ih~ir through lh secol1dan chool wd their influcncc Oil lCademic pn~lrn1alKe Bllti_f lotmil
tdlildtiOllit -) 205- 221 Kanl
ClIl 1 amp Alexander I (I )()6) Xhere giftd children do 1Ild do nO[ cxcel on llleracogshy
n irin lasb Noel) NcriCiI 18 12lt 1( 1)
Cherne L 11 VinrCl J amp Chlrnc j1 l (200i) NucleH problem s()h-ln~ Kanl
elise stUlh of expert-I1Oicl differences hllliSlletoll fI(the iVdmtI of
Seillle w 1-- hi 11 T H (lascL R amp iarr 1 J (itk) (19HHl Ihc Itttn If
NJ Lawrence Erlbaulll King I
CsiksCIHIll ihali 1 1 Ib rJundt K amp Whakn S ( 1 )94) ]tIIIItc tieillgcn 11( mou of I 1 JifCCC-S Iiiirifllllln Bmrou ( PrlmiddotSS ~
[lidson I L amp I I tJ)Hj)lh roll ofimighr in ilwlIeuual ~ifredncs King l
(dial Child (jlltrtal ]8 is-hi dc Urnl 1 amp lLlll~jl 1 11()()iIlhlmiddot riariollshil hcmlln 1biliriLs and slt1rshy
regllbrld Ic~lrning l ilkncc ti) imcraLTiolb with leIck-mil sdt~lomcpt Ild gender
iglllbiit) lirlI ( 2() 1 ) S
Felder R (19~J 1 kCl our s1Udenrs Dac hrrlLl and Ruhcllo ChtlJiicd KItin
Fdll(iltOi31 10(- j() d Cllb~hcr J l-Llrrallilll C ( 0 (olcn1lt1ll ~1 R (J 9F) UlilIkllgc or boredom Ciftld Ii
tlldIHS ics on rhir ((Pi1 NUiCli 19 132~l(1 iI
Callagher S A (l)lt)H 11 he ((lld 10 ulrinl rhinking I he scheille lilt llleH1in~ht KIo I
ditttTcnriation ii Hill(IiII 8li iL)) 12-20 ic Calb~her S 1 (2()()()1 l rhmiddot to slience expcrtiscmiddot In F Dixon amp S Kronl](I
0100[1 ( l IitI)i u (lllllIO1 [PI 1()~middot+6(J) I1U) TX (n
Irufroc k Prns larson 1
CipsoJ] 1 brdulll 1 0 Ic1111ll L t 19S)1 Rcll(ollhil hC[Cll1 t(lrmal-opltTniullll dlOughr and ttllhclrud ditkulrie in geflLtiS problem IUIilidl ofRlsldJ(f ill --I J gt~
Slilll( ( S 1 1--S2 I Loell (
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
17 DESIGNED TO fiT
ul
IX
Gorodetsky 1 amp Klavir R (2003) What can we learn from how giftedaverage pupils
describe their processes of problem solving) Learning amp Instruction 13 305-326 Grabner R Neubauer A amp Srern E (2006) Superior performance and neural efficiencv
Ihe impact of intelligence and expertise Brain Research Bulletin 69 422-439 Haicr R J JUl1g R E Yeo R A Head K amp Alkire M r (200t) Srrllcrural brain
variHion and general inrelligence Netlroimage J L 425-435 Henderson S (J 995) Vh do I hae ro be here) The Advanced Placement srudelH in
firs(~vear composition Problems and isslles in cognitive development journal ondar) Gifted EduCtlri(Jl 7 )24-532
Hong L (19)9) Swdying the mind of rhe gifted ROfper Relieu 21 244-2)2 Hurst R amp Milkenr 11 (1996) Facilitaring successful prediccion problem gt(living in
biology through application ofskill theor jOllnJal ill Scimce ) 541-)52
Inhclder fl amp Piager j (19)8) the cililrflIor1I IlrO-fi((
Jew York Basic fI()oks
Jarvin L amp Subomik R (2006) Understanding elitc taient ill acadcmil domaim A
dcvclopmcl1(al ttajccwn from hasic ahilities O scholarlv producrivitvcmisfr In E A Dixon amp S 1 Moon (Eek) thc hillidbook (pp205-220) vhco TX Prufrock Press
Kancsky L (1)92) Gifred children and thc learning process Imights on both tlom rhe
rcsearch III E Miinks amp Xi Peters (Eds) J(tlmr r1( (pp 1))middot161) Asscn
Ihe 0lctherlands Van CorClUll
Kanevsky L amp KeighlcvL (2003) 1~) produce or nor ro produce understanding hOi dum and the honor in umkrlchkl111cnr RCIitll26 2()2R
Kauflll]n J C Gentile C r amp Bllf J (200)) Do gifted sflllknr writers and crec)(ive
writing experts raIL lTlcni in till same Child QlltlltCrl 4) 2()O-265 King P v1 amp Kitchener K S (1)94) jll(zr1II IllI
flild illtcllltfli ill flrocsCm fllld (lIn San
Francisco Josse~ Bass
King l 1 amp Kitchencr K S (2004) Iefieltivc judgllllm Ihcorv and research on thl
dtveioplllelH ()f pircmic assllmptions through adulrhood Fdilolfiolltll
YJ(I) )-lR
Kitchener K S (1 )HI) Cogllition Il1ctalugnirioll and episttmic cognition A rhrcltlevel
model of cognitivc pnllc fl1I11II11I )11 dOjJ 1IItl1 I 6 222~252 Klein J T (I ))3) Blurring CLIcking mel crossing Permcation and thc fracturing of
discipline In E lesscr-DlidO D R ShUlllV amp D J Shan (Eds) (Pl 1 Hi-21 I) Charlnwsdle Uniersin
of Virginia Press
Kloss R J (19)4) nudge is hest Helping srudems throllgh rhe Iern schellll of intll
Iccruat Jeel0pllhnr I] I i 1-1 lH
Kronholm M 1 (19J) l Ihe i mp)ct of dCIdnpmenral instruction on rcHen ill iudgmellL
RCIieU ofHigber ErlIldtillll I i 1))-middot2)) Larson R V amp Richmk 1 11 1 L)J 1 ugusr) Boredom in (hi middle scilll() I
ears Blaming schoolgt erus gtIamitlg mdenrs 1l11encdll jOIiJIiI OjliJI(I[JOII 9)
418-44) Lmell C X amp 0unnen j i 2()()i i Tesling the adulr dCelopme1( I()CI of [lahel
hvpothesis HOI1l0gillCOll hmiddot lln position mllaboldtile learning groups and grcldu
ate student sarisfanion tllrtr 11 IY) 1)0
A Guide to Recommended Practices
L GtgtLlA(HER18
Ludlow B L amp Voodrum D T (1)82) Problem-sohing and aerag~
Icarners on a multiple discrimination task (ild
Matthews D amp lkLwghlin T 1)94) EHects otleHIlr-cclHcln acthitics on
achievement and students preterences in [So hiih 5c11Ol lLtrSes HI(tPWdl
fllld AOo)li -8 28)-286 ivlcDonJkl J (I )Kl) Cogniric dcnlopmenr Jnd the rlUdU or geometric contcllr
Rlslrd ill f(ltbcJlldti f((cilwm 20 -11-)4
vlontlgue 1 (19() 1 J Cihnl and Icnning diabkd gifrcd smdllls lise of knowledge and
usc of mrriHIllHicli and prohlem sohing srrarcgic I I(uuioll oftII
11 Y))-+II
middotluis K (2004) ierson(rl cpisrcmologv and marhcmuics - critical rcic and smhesis
of research RcIlli lifdll(lIli()Ii Retii -1 31--3-- Neher H amp Scholllnllr-middotikim 1 (20021 Sclf-regubted ilIKC with hiohl
gitted students l11e rok of cogn it i l l110t i UiOll] L pist cillologicd md cm [ron l1](llshy
[11 (1liahle linif Stili lin 3( I i iC)_-I
Nelson C E (I )8)) Skcwered on th unicorns horn 111lt iluion or the rr(lckotf between content and LTitk1 thinking in the lcaching otsliLllcC [n L X row (Edi
(nth II iii hI j(ltIlaquo rpp 17_-) (lshingrotl DC ]11[onll
Scimee (ltrehers AsOl iou ion
Nelson c E (1 )9() Studellt dicrsir rCl]uircs ditknm appro(lLhcs to collqc tcaciling
Cln in math llld sckncc iIIlT(dl Fiehtllltl(ri S((illhl -10 1(1)-1)
Niaz L amp Robinson Xi (1 j)2) IW1l algllrithmic mode [(l Ol1ccprur1 gCs[1lt in
1Il1lkrstanding rill blhavior of gibe An cpiSlclllOiogic11 pcrspccric Rt(Igt ii)(fshy
IIII 0 ic(bliologiCd hhl(iltiOi J(J )5-(H
Ilttry V ( II (I JeD) hJlII ojilferlld tllirl erb(lt r(ICOPJltJ iii tilt ieiln J Idllltll NeW York Holt Rinehart amp iINon
Plucker J A amp kInrire J (1 l9()) lldel11il sllnilbilin ill high-pOIClHill middle school StlldllltS Cifra (hlld I() --1middot1
Rahinmviu 0 CIar R (llJH)) Cq rulturc Ilnd proces in high U)11Pl lent plrr()rmOlllcmiddot In I D Horcmill 0 1 OBrkn ([k) 111 1111r1Ii1fmte4
11 perpeelIlc (PI -)-)8) ahjn~[oil DC rmCIIlCn ycltologkJI
-soc ia[i 0 n
RohimoJl amp Clinkcnbeard l R (1 ))8) Clftcdncss An cxccprlonaiirv examined
AIIlliltl1 RIIicll j) 11- 151
Ruh1I1 L amp RcI S ((()() Pancrn ohdi~rcglliatiotl jl(men of strHcS
lISC 11llOllg I[)v-Khiing mel high-lchicing univnsin sludlHs ROi lt11leu 8 14K-I
Rv(m 1 (I )k+) loniwring [Xl (ol1lprci1lnsion Inciiidud dirkrcllns in
ul gttandards JOIIiIId
SaL U (2004) A npls ()fhiftd adobccnrsoilld
Schummll 1 (I ))l 11 lOllccprualilllriol1 O(CpiSlcllloiogical hdicl~ and thcir
role 011 kamint In R (lrtlCr ( i A Alexander (Lds) dOllIiX( lid ilitJlC
(iOIl Itit tCXI 2i--fOI liillbJc 1 LlTClllC Erlblllll1
Scitorn1l1er 1 amp DUIlIlLil l 1Jrl Epistcmologicti bdd~ or littcd high chuol
studcllls RalIi 19 1-middot1 )(
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
SChOlllll1(
enul
J7I Shieci
d ir )l)-
Shore II
chilei JlIT
Shore H
dllf
i( ) Sowell
1()
i
Span I
Stcinc I
a rmiddot fl]
SrlillC1 i
In Srcrnh~l
L f Slnnh_
(
Suhotl1~
fhollLh
ch
11lt 111 __
~ ~ tcshy
ri
choo
DESICNED FiT
Schommer-AikinsL Duell 0 K amp Hurter R (2005) Epistemological mathshy
emarical probkm-solving beliefs and academic of middle school students
Ihe 105289-304 Shieer S amp ]1aker C J 199-) Enrichment and acceleration An meniew 1I1d new
directions In ~ Colangelo amp C Davis Haildboo edllcation 99-110) Boston Allm amp Bacon
Shore B M (2000) ktacognitiol1 and Hexibilitmiddot differences in how gifted
children think In R C Friedman amp B 1 Shore (Elk) rllllts ulljf)dillg CogshylIitioli and dlleopllllt 16--1Sn vrashil1gton DC American PsChological
Association
Shore B 1 amp Irving J (200j) Inquirv as a Il(dagogicallink hetween expnie lnc
giftedness111e lbili( lI1d inquin resc1ch group at 1cCili Lnhmiddotcrir
fwd tofld IlIteliirUllilidl O( 1)5-40
Shore B fL amp Lazar 1 (1996) differences in time alltlcatiol1 Irhlc-m
-8 11411-S49
Sowell L R 1cters()ll B S lhol11pon P 1 e1cuIllLmiddot S [ Il~nklt nill L amp lc)gl A V (2003l bpping cortical Cross rhe human lit~ pan MUIII
iVmoicillIr( () 309-51 i
Span )1 amp Oertool11-COrSIll iL R (19H6) Informatioll ng hmiddot intellectual
pupils sullillg Illarhcmuical prohlems Frill(tlliolldl Stil 1 Alarfeillrltio -
273-291 SteineL H H amp Carr 1 12(05) C
more preci undersundinf of Hrclgr RIIiCli 15 21)-21
denmiddotlopl11lnt in children Toward
di fferenccs ill i mel Iigencl Ldi(tltlOlIr
Stcimmiddotr H H amp Clrr 1 (200() 1 r(ldolIIl11t oproJIeil -ollilI Iii gijicrl lllirl Ilmgl~iiil) (fidllll lc(rr(J liml d(fo(illiilt to edliCtiolliI
I-bllppauge lY Ioa Science
Srnnbcrg R J (Ed) (191-12) flIIrll)(o ahliililll illllllgolec ~e York Cambridge
Unlnsir Press
StLrnberg RI (2()()~ L hroJd ie or il1telligencefllc thl(l~ of sllcccssful
COllilltilig lotrildmiddot Jritti(1 illlt R(tllc 55 15)-1 i-l
Sllbotnik R F (2()(Ul doicC1[ pathway to lmll1LIllC ill seicnlL Lcsom irom the
music COIlSLratoIY III P CLTmch- amp L ledcrlllltln (hisl SUOi([ (rII(lItioll [tllII
rnmitllloi( i1Hd pllblli 2)i-502) Burke lOS Pre
lhonl1sI- (200S) RCiing and
ethnicity Il()n~ gifted high SdlOUI sllIdcJl(
Wluing 1 (1989) Logical IllCe-sln to mlkc line graphs j(llnldl itl middotcima J( 3-1-3 -q
Veins[Ock 1 )culllan Y amp iaiuk 1 2()) I) liing thc point or [hL nomh
of wdcllts to icklltit Ltliaiouo argumiddot I11cnts )( 1) -94
Wilkinson V K amp 1)lt)1 i Ih influencc of collegc stmle-nt
logical Ull clecrlLi to h- i 11 ~ prO(SL~ ([Ier rcb iN UJ~Ji()
Vilkinsoll X K amp Sdmart l II I 9fCllhc oricllLltioll I gittLd
adolcsccnrs 11 tL (d 11[ model Reports hJ r6-l)-k
Young E (2001 hyJun(i rlh l)uildillg blocks ()tlir~ fJ COlriu j(gt--+H
A Guide to Recommended Practices
19
GALLAGHER20
Yurgelun-1()dd D A amp Kilgore X D (2006) harmiddotmiddotre8ted acridt in the prefrontal
cortex increases with age during adolescence A preliminary f1RI study Neuroscience Lmer406194-19()
Zhang L F (J 999) Furrher cross-cultural validation of rill theory of menul self-governshymenr journal 133 16)-1)1
Zhang L F amp atkins D (200 II Cognitivc dcvcloplllll1t llld stUdcnt approaches to
learning An investigation ofPerns theor~ vith Clullcse and US uniersitv students Higher EduCfltiol1 41239-2(1
SUSANr
We
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
GALLAGHER10
of content skill and flexibility in critical thinking and self-regulation Gifted srudenrs seem to intuitively have some expert-like skills (Kaufman er ai 2005) while others are only acquired through training (Cherney et ai 2005)
Reviewing the literature on expertise Carr and Alexander (1996) pointed our
that it more than skill and ability to be an expert Although experts need sufficient general ability (IQ) to perf()fm at a high level other such as task
commitmenr a sttOng knowledge and social suppOrt are more important tor developing expertise and promoting achievement through expertise (p 214) Ihe list of teguiremenrs for expertise also includes perspective forward problem solving persistence risk taking and tacit knowledge professional language and behaviors Jarvin amp Sllbornik 2006 Shore 2000 Sternberg 2(03) Expershy
tise in this larger sense can be devcoped using curriculum and instruction
emphasize problem solving open-ended questions construction ofideas multiple
perspectives and exposure to disciplinary experts (Gallagher 2006 Shore amp Irving
2005 Sternberg 2003 Sllbornik 2003) [11 sum gifted students cognitivl characteristics parallel those of adult lxperts
Ensuring thar gifted srudlnts continue to develop lxperr-like skills requires
bull exposure to explicit and tacit dbciplinary knowledge bull time to engage in flexibll thinking with disciplinary and interdisciplinary
content
bull curriculum and instruction thar incorporate inquiry cOl1ceptuallearning and authentic conrexts and
bull opportunities f(lI problem solving and mentorships
The Role of Student Perspective Epistemology
Still missing is perhaps t11l most importanr rlCror abollt the education ofgifred adole~cellts Etons to design effective programs and promote new kinds of practice will be for naught if thc srudems themselves do not recognize the significance or
valuc in (he tasks assigned [ he t(JrI11 of perspecrivl in question is tpistemgy ones abo lit rhe nature
of knowledge Perry (1 presel1[ed a developmental scheme that made direct
and pragmatic application [0 the classroom tor it described both how students
views of knowledge change Ocr time and also the powerful eteCt ditering views
have in the classroom Perrys scheme presents nine distincr positions that can be collapsed into four broad suges as sUlllmarized by Gallagher (2006)
Dualism Marked by a black-and-white perspective srudents at rhis sragl
believe aillegirimate questions have certain anSWlrs So-called questions without answers are jmt nOl1seme questions pointless
Multiplicity Stlldents acknowledge that there arc a kw unanswered
questions hut hdiCL dur in the absence of an ltlnswer all opinions on the matter are egualk alid
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Student
III
kl(
[h
hu [he ~J
() r
lV ~ rk Illmiddot
I I ~
id
11
kJ
11 DESIGNED TO FIT
middot dti t
1 __1
tl
n~
u~url
- l i rlcl
cLnt~
~ leWS
-1-1 be
lll1
Contextual Relativism Unanswered questions are investigated using the
tools provided by each discipline each discipline approaches questions in a different wav Certain amwers are unlikely bur a best ansver can
be achieved using the proper rools
CommitmentDialectic Theories are used [() set directions for imporshy
cam questions most of which have no right or wrong answers Gaining understanding requires building upon the possibilities presented by dara as interpreted by a consciously selected point ofview bur with willingness
to change perspective if rhe need arises (p 436)
l~lble 1 presents the f(lUr stages aligned with the beliefs about learning that Iecomshy
pany each stage For a more concrete example comider Carl and Cedric two students waitshy
ing for class to begin Carl believes rlwt knowledge means fH-rS and being knowledgeable means remembering lots of bets Cedric 011 the other band
thinks that knowledge is the abilitv to combine bcts to create ideas For Cedric
being knowledgeable isnt aboll[ the numher of ElCts he knows its ahout how the [Kts can form and rd()fIll to create diffltrent ideas Their teacher Ms Morshy
gan starts her lecture on the Trail oflCars f()(using on the sequence of even ts
detailing what who and when Carl picks up his pen and starts studiously takshying notes Cedric slumps down in his desk grumbling [lCtoids-lbe two boys
hear the same lccrure bom the same teacher but their ditterent belids abour
knowledge afftC[ bow willing they are to accept the inf()rmation as meaningful or valid
A numher ofrheories nmv artempt to describe aspects ofepistel11ological develshyopment (Baxter 1agolda 1987 King amp Kitchener 1994 Schommer 1994) Each theory describes sequen tiaL developmentalmovemenr from a low or naive stance in which knowledge is equated with flctllal inr()Jmation and memorization to
a high or mature stance in which bets are used ro build theories from a
consciollsly selected point ofview but with willingness w change perspective if the need arises (C~lllagher 2006 p 43(1) In the example above Carl holds a navc
stallce and thu~ is happy to gather up a list of taCtS from the lecture Cedrics stance
is more mature and he wishes the flcts had been embedded in more meaningful ideas
Je ComprelJemizie Irnptlct (1Fpitemgy At one level the impact of Carls
and Cedrics differing heliefs is immediately apparent Students are not like ro learn what the do 110 helilVl to be Illeaningfu-or at least they wont learn it
t()r long After two decades of reselrch into the effeC( of epistemology on karning
it is clear that the impact extends hevond whether students like whl( thl learn to
a number of other important ilCldll1lic Ol[COll1es dCllciemil ilcJitlJcmcnt Using a structural equation
analysis Cano (2005) f()ulld that high school students epistemological stance had
both direct and indirect effects 011 academic achievement Similar results have been
A Guide to Recommended Practices
Stages of Epistemological
Development(3
co Beliefs 3 Associated With the Positionl shyVgt rI)
1 rI) ~
~ -shy
Instruction That C
Matches~
shyshy Epistemological Vgt ngt Stage 0 l- -lt Instruction That Vgt Encourages c shy Movement to a ~ Higher Stage
Earlier Positions
r 0 ~ ~
T 4~ r r r ~
TABLI 1
Perrys StagesPositions of Epistemological Reasoning and Related Instructional Strategies
-
Dualism Multiplicity Relativism
Knowledge is cer- Some questions have I Knowledge is interpreted tam (right or wrong) no certain answers in and unambiquous these cases knowledge
I in context distinguishing better from worse answers
and truth are subjec- Irequires selecting theories Authorities (teachers) live so everyones opinshy Ih b jt he quPtiouknow The Truth ion is eq~llyvalid
Activities that help Practice in comparshy Practice in creating students develop skill ing hypotheses and
comparing and select-
in memorization and theories acknowledgshy ing preferable theoshyrecall mnemonics etc ing all possibilities retical models
in exoert behaviors
Exposure to lems with more than in different disciplines one right answer andl to conduct research or more than one construct theories approach to a solution and make decisions
RanCJe of Typical School Senior
Range of Gifted High School Senior
~ ~ I g C shy ~ n ~ -5 ~ ~ ~ ~ shy
~- ~ ~r r rshy - shyr r l
~ r- r
2-~ r- shy shy
~
r r
I CommitmentDialectic
Knowledge methods are and uncertain Choices require analysis and values
Later Positions
n Z 0 l ln 0r
~ shy~
N
( raquo shyraquo CI J
0
13 DESIGNED TO FIT
found with middle school srudenrs (Schommer-Aikins Duell amp 11l[ter 2005) Studenrs at lower levels may have trouble correcring misconceptions and draw
only fact-based information from inquiry-oriented environments (Ryan ] 984) Epistemological Jtanee aJectJ ildvanced academic performance Students with
more advanced belief have an easier time building logical arguments (Weinstock
Kellman amp Tabak 2(04) they tend to choose thinking strategies that Slipport
deep rather than surface learning (Cano 2005 Zhang amp Watkins 2(01) Kitchshy
enet (1983) also suggested that students selectioll of meracognirive strategies can
be affected by their epis((mologicai beliefs Support for this idea comes from a study by Ruban and Reis (2006) who found that high-achieving students tended
to select cnhancemem oriented learning strategies while lower achieving srudents
selected survival oriented strategies
Illstruction can encourage )WIemem to higber epistemological elcTelChers
can affecr changes in students epistemological thinking through intentionally
structllred learning experiences (Kloss 1094 Kronholm 1993l Strategies recomshy
mended to dCc1op epistemological thinking include using ill-structured problems
and instructional straregics thar allow srudenrs to examine their assumptions anashy
lyze data that present different conHicting perspectiyes and then make decisions
(King amp Kitchener 20(4) Devoting some time to direct instruction about tbe
narure of the discipline helps develop higher levels of reasoning (Bdl 20(4) vhmltltch bet1 iecn instructiol t7 lid epistemoogiCtl Itllnee (pnspect i IJt) colltributes
to jruurrltiol[ (wd disillusiolllJlflll Cedric didnt respond well when Ms Marrin
started a f1Cr-based lecture Over time he will simply decide that school is trivial
or worse meaningless Had Ms 1artin staned imtead with a discllssion of the
violation of Native Americans sense of personhood Cedric wOllld have been
thrilled and Carl would hae been lost This kind of disparity creates barriers to
learning (Nelson 19()6 PelTY 1(70) --Jebel and Schommer-Aikins (2002) f()lnd
that a mismatch between insrruction and stance caused work avoidance among
some high school phYsics students Lovell and lunnefY (2004) ltJUnd that srudents
even found small-group work Illore Itisfing when they Vere grouped according
to sranct (perspecrhc)
Giftrd tlldCIIpound1 tmel to tlJead iii epistemgical dezclopllllllt Stll(iiLs of adoshylescents doculllent that cpistemological belicts mature in a pndioablc dcvelopshy
mental sequcnce (Cano 200) Zhang amp latk ins 2(01) In parallcl to formal
operational reasoning gifred rdoiesccl1t move through episremologicli stges in
the same sequence (Ihomas 2()08) but tend to be a stage or rwo ahead of orlIer
rhe same age (Arlin amp LCirr Il))X Goldberger 1981 Schollll11er I Dunnell
1997 ~n1Omas) 2008 Wilkinsoll I Iaxwcll 1991 iilkinsoll amp Schw~lrtz 19X-1
Lible 1 provides a general seme of the distribution of senior year studcm baSell on existing research
Adult experts tend to holt IlrlzlIIeal epi)tllIIologimlliClls -Ihc epistcl11ojogicri
framework also provides a UHl1lCtiOIl to anuther aspect of experrisc -CIO the
disciplines the behaviors and l([irlllk associared with mature episrel11ologv arc
A Guide to Recommended Practices
[
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
gt ~ ~--------------
GALLAGHER14
considered essential for advanced authentic work (Buehl amp Alexander 2005 Felder 1997 Henderson 1995 Kloss 1994 Muis 20(4)
Connections With G~fted Education Evidence that gifted students tend ro
be somewhat ahead of their age-mates in epistemological development follows
naturally from the data on formal operations reponed above However other
inreresting connections bring this theon into cohesion with existing knowledge
of giftltd students for example there is some indication that people who prlttCr
Intuition on the Jhers-Briggs Type Inventory tend [() have higher epistemologishy
cal stances (Zhang 199()) Cifted rudents overwhelmingly report this prdlrenCl
(Sak 2004) and the connecrion gives further evidencc that giftcd students will
respond best to open-ended inquiry-oriented learning environments Similarly
it explains gifted adolescents positive response to mentOr relationships Like
all adolescents gifted reenagers want to see similarities bcrween themselves and
others in mentors they find kindred spirits who think abour ideas from similar
frames of mind
Most exciting perhaps is the COil necrion between epistell1oosY md expertise
Not only do gifted students show earlv potential to achieve the expens high levels
of reasoning bur also epistell1ologicalll10deis provide a guide to he p explain how [() move all students closer to authentic higher order reasoning Callagher (l99X) suggested that models slIch as these would make effecdve frameworks for designing
high school curriculum providing an organic model for differentiation Based on
his study of adolescent epistelllological beliefs Cano (200raquo) concurred
it is necessary to take into account nor only students previous knowlshy
edge and learning strategies bur also their learning approaches and
epistemological beliefs Secondlv wc should work directly to try to
enhance [he depth of learning approaches and the complexity of episshy
temological belid~ as way of improving academic achievemenc (p 217)
Finally this framework reinforces the notion that the outcomes tt)r ignorshy
ing srudents beliefs are grave Srudents have trouble accepting the relevance of
instrtlLtion that is out of sync with their stag (Perr- ]970) a finding that is
consonant with the well-established knowledge that gifred adolescents reject munshy
dane repetitive curriculum hlrrher gifted students operating at higher levels than
other students find instrllction orienred towards the majorit uninspiring and
communicate their feelings through underachievement More sltriollsly perhaps
Nelson (1989) cautioned that excessive time spent in low-lenl curriculum actively
builds a wall of habit that blocks the path to higher level reasoning Even rapid
acceleration can havc this d~magillg eftect ifstudenrs are onlv accelerated into nev
low-level content It) prmidl a climl[e read for higher order thinking educators
must present COIltCIH that is accelerated vertically as well as horizomalh-
CI [
tCl ~I
1
lhe IS 110 i I
and fUc
hest n~II
15
bull - r
~ shy
~
~n( )1shy
()f ut I
l1UI1shy
[hm
inti
lpid
DLltiCNEl) TO m
Complete Coherence Evidence-Based Recommendations for
Differentiation in Secondary School
Each of the perspecrivcs considercc1 in this rationale is championed h differshy
ent researchers operating from different paradigms and using differenr research
techniques Even so their respectin findings arc remarkably similar
1 Gifted adolescents nced exposure [0 ~l larger quanrity of coment that
the find dnllenging Beginning at least in middle schooL abstract conshy
tenr should he a srandard part of their curriculum I he importlnle of developing a plenriful high-quality wcll of information i essLlHial as
it is a precursor to using higher order thinking ll1etJcognitivc thinking
and abstract thinking Cifted students will lot adequJtek develop their
thinking skills without this knowledge base 2 A quality knowledge bZlse is neCssary hilt notutticilmiddotllt ItH developing
thinking skilk Ciftecl studenrs 1lUt be presented with Ierning experishy
ences that require them to engage their critical thinking skills and metlshy
cognitive skills If they do not find their assignments challenging their
brains willilot engage their higher order functions T()gether content and
strategv med along ith metacognition predict academic perf()[mltlnce
making the simultalleous devdopmenr of these three paramount
3 Cifted students show earl~ promise t()r deydoping expertise Capitalizi ng
on that earlv promise requires instruction where stlldems Gl1 practice the
qualities of expcrtbe including open-ended imtruction inquiry-based
instruction problcm-oriented instrucrion field experiences and menrorshy
ships all cCl1[ercd 011 high-qualitv disciplinarv or imcrdisciplinary content
Cifted srudents arc most lihk to sec this instruction as relevant and draw
maximum value hom it
4 Expertisc requircs more thall contLflt and skill habits of mind ~llld
~llhaI1C1d epistemological re~lsoning also arc essentiaL If we aspirc for gifted students-~or for allY s(Udel1l~--to hecome creative productive leadshy
ers in their chosen field curriculutH ~lJld instruction should he selected to
develop these simultaneoush- and include exposure to the philosophies
and (thics of thc disciplines
The absence of a qualin- differerlliated secondary progrll11 flH gifted students
is not a neutral position it is 1 choice that will result in deficit skill dCeopmcnt
and student apathy At worr it ill result in the disillusionment some of the
best minds in the country
A Guide to Recommended Practices
i
GALLAGHER16
References
Arlin P K amp Levin L (1998) A deelopmenta perspc((ic on giftedness
HeetlrcIoltnlld I )4~~5i(1 Baxter Jvlagolda Jvl B (J 987) Comparing open-ended inteljcs lnd standardized mea- Hair
sun of inrelieefUal development ollilla Strfmt PCIJoiJle 28 443~44S -i
BdL E (2004) Promoring StUdUHS argumenr consrrncriOll and collahorativc debate in thc Hell science classfl)om rn ~ 1 C Linn E A Davis amp P Bell (Eds J Imimlt J1lrOltrrIOtS h~middot
seimC IIiCilioll (pp 11 i-145) lal11ah 1 Lawrence Erlballl11
rkrningcr V amp Yates C (J (95) Formal operational thought in rhe gifted A postshy H(ln~
Piagetian pnspecriC Hu(ti (nilli I) 220~224 HUN
Rirnn B L (l991 Formal operHional nlsolling Illodes Predictors of critical thinking
abilit ies alld grade assigned Iw reacher in sciencc and nlarhemltltics il[ student in
grades nine rhrough [tke Ollljli ill Sciei( 28 2()-2~4 InhclcL
Buehl 1 amp Alnlnder P (2001) lorivarion and pnr~HlllaJl(e ditferemes in srudelJ[
dOllllin-specific epiSrllllUI()~illt11 bel iet profiles ilIHlIll FdllClitiolfll NCilllrchOII1i
middoti2 (N-- - 2(
ClIlO I (200i) Lpistcl]ologicai bclid~ IJlld a[lproaches to Icllning Ih~ir through lh secol1dan chool wd their influcncc Oil lCademic pn~lrn1alKe Bllti_f lotmil
tdlildtiOllit -) 205- 221 Kanl
ClIl 1 amp Alexander I (I )()6) Xhere giftd children do 1Ild do nO[ cxcel on llleracogshy
n irin lasb Noel) NcriCiI 18 12lt 1( 1)
Cherne L 11 VinrCl J amp Chlrnc j1 l (200i) NucleH problem s()h-ln~ Kanl
elise stUlh of expert-I1Oicl differences hllliSlletoll fI(the iVdmtI of
Seillle w 1-- hi 11 T H (lascL R amp iarr 1 J (itk) (19HHl Ihc Itttn If
NJ Lawrence Erlbaulll King I
CsiksCIHIll ihali 1 1 Ib rJundt K amp Whakn S ( 1 )94) ]tIIIItc tieillgcn 11( mou of I 1 JifCCC-S Iiiirifllllln Bmrou ( PrlmiddotSS ~
[lidson I L amp I I tJ)Hj)lh roll ofimighr in ilwlIeuual ~ifredncs King l
(dial Child (jlltrtal ]8 is-hi dc Urnl 1 amp lLlll~jl 1 11()()iIlhlmiddot riariollshil hcmlln 1biliriLs and slt1rshy
regllbrld Ic~lrning l ilkncc ti) imcraLTiolb with leIck-mil sdt~lomcpt Ild gender
iglllbiit) lirlI ( 2() 1 ) S
Felder R (19~J 1 kCl our s1Udenrs Dac hrrlLl and Ruhcllo ChtlJiicd KItin
Fdll(iltOi31 10(- j() d Cllb~hcr J l-Llrrallilll C ( 0 (olcn1lt1ll ~1 R (J 9F) UlilIkllgc or boredom Ciftld Ii
tlldIHS ics on rhir ((Pi1 NUiCli 19 132~l(1 iI
Callagher S A (l)lt)H 11 he ((lld 10 ulrinl rhinking I he scheille lilt llleH1in~ht KIo I
ditttTcnriation ii Hill(IiII 8li iL)) 12-20 ic Calb~her S 1 (2()()()1 l rhmiddot to slience expcrtiscmiddot In F Dixon amp S Kronl](I
0100[1 ( l IitI)i u (lllllIO1 [PI 1()~middot+6(J) I1U) TX (n
Irufroc k Prns larson 1
CipsoJ] 1 brdulll 1 0 Ic1111ll L t 19S)1 Rcll(ollhil hC[Cll1 t(lrmal-opltTniullll dlOughr and ttllhclrud ditkulrie in geflLtiS problem IUIilidl ofRlsldJ(f ill --I J gt~
Slilll( ( S 1 1--S2 I Loell (
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
17 DESIGNED TO fiT
ul
IX
Gorodetsky 1 amp Klavir R (2003) What can we learn from how giftedaverage pupils
describe their processes of problem solving) Learning amp Instruction 13 305-326 Grabner R Neubauer A amp Srern E (2006) Superior performance and neural efficiencv
Ihe impact of intelligence and expertise Brain Research Bulletin 69 422-439 Haicr R J JUl1g R E Yeo R A Head K amp Alkire M r (200t) Srrllcrural brain
variHion and general inrelligence Netlroimage J L 425-435 Henderson S (J 995) Vh do I hae ro be here) The Advanced Placement srudelH in
firs(~vear composition Problems and isslles in cognitive development journal ondar) Gifted EduCtlri(Jl 7 )24-532
Hong L (19)9) Swdying the mind of rhe gifted ROfper Relieu 21 244-2)2 Hurst R amp Milkenr 11 (1996) Facilitaring successful prediccion problem gt(living in
biology through application ofskill theor jOllnJal ill Scimce ) 541-)52
Inhclder fl amp Piager j (19)8) the cililrflIor1I IlrO-fi((
Jew York Basic fI()oks
Jarvin L amp Subomik R (2006) Understanding elitc taient ill acadcmil domaim A
dcvclopmcl1(al ttajccwn from hasic ahilities O scholarlv producrivitvcmisfr In E A Dixon amp S 1 Moon (Eek) thc hillidbook (pp205-220) vhco TX Prufrock Press
Kancsky L (1)92) Gifred children and thc learning process Imights on both tlom rhe
rcsearch III E Miinks amp Xi Peters (Eds) J(tlmr r1( (pp 1))middot161) Asscn
Ihe 0lctherlands Van CorClUll
Kanevsky L amp KeighlcvL (2003) 1~) produce or nor ro produce understanding hOi dum and the honor in umkrlchkl111cnr RCIitll26 2()2R
Kauflll]n J C Gentile C r amp Bllf J (200)) Do gifted sflllknr writers and crec)(ive
writing experts raIL lTlcni in till same Child QlltlltCrl 4) 2()O-265 King P v1 amp Kitchener K S (1)94) jll(zr1II IllI
flild illtcllltfli ill flrocsCm fllld (lIn San
Francisco Josse~ Bass
King l 1 amp Kitchencr K S (2004) Iefieltivc judgllllm Ihcorv and research on thl
dtveioplllelH ()f pircmic assllmptions through adulrhood Fdilolfiolltll
YJ(I) )-lR
Kitchener K S (1 )HI) Cogllition Il1ctalugnirioll and episttmic cognition A rhrcltlevel
model of cognitivc pnllc fl1I11II11I )11 dOjJ 1IItl1 I 6 222~252 Klein J T (I ))3) Blurring CLIcking mel crossing Permcation and thc fracturing of
discipline In E lesscr-DlidO D R ShUlllV amp D J Shan (Eds) (Pl 1 Hi-21 I) Charlnwsdle Uniersin
of Virginia Press
Kloss R J (19)4) nudge is hest Helping srudems throllgh rhe Iern schellll of intll
Iccruat Jeel0pllhnr I] I i 1-1 lH
Kronholm M 1 (19J) l Ihe i mp)ct of dCIdnpmenral instruction on rcHen ill iudgmellL
RCIieU ofHigber ErlIldtillll I i 1))-middot2)) Larson R V amp Richmk 1 11 1 L)J 1 ugusr) Boredom in (hi middle scilll() I
ears Blaming schoolgt erus gtIamitlg mdenrs 1l11encdll jOIiJIiI OjliJI(I[JOII 9)
418-44) Lmell C X amp 0unnen j i 2()()i i Tesling the adulr dCelopme1( I()CI of [lahel
hvpothesis HOI1l0gillCOll hmiddot lln position mllaboldtile learning groups and grcldu
ate student sarisfanion tllrtr 11 IY) 1)0
A Guide to Recommended Practices
L GtgtLlA(HER18
Ludlow B L amp Voodrum D T (1)82) Problem-sohing and aerag~
Icarners on a multiple discrimination task (ild
Matthews D amp lkLwghlin T 1)94) EHects otleHIlr-cclHcln acthitics on
achievement and students preterences in [So hiih 5c11Ol lLtrSes HI(tPWdl
fllld AOo)li -8 28)-286 ivlcDonJkl J (I )Kl) Cogniric dcnlopmenr Jnd the rlUdU or geometric contcllr
Rlslrd ill f(ltbcJlldti f((cilwm 20 -11-)4
vlontlgue 1 (19() 1 J Cihnl and Icnning diabkd gifrcd smdllls lise of knowledge and
usc of mrriHIllHicli and prohlem sohing srrarcgic I I(uuioll oftII
11 Y))-+II
middotluis K (2004) ierson(rl cpisrcmologv and marhcmuics - critical rcic and smhesis
of research RcIlli lifdll(lIli()Ii Retii -1 31--3-- Neher H amp Scholllnllr-middotikim 1 (20021 Sclf-regubted ilIKC with hiohl
gitted students l11e rok of cogn it i l l110t i UiOll] L pist cillologicd md cm [ron l1](llshy
[11 (1liahle linif Stili lin 3( I i iC)_-I
Nelson C E (I )8)) Skcwered on th unicorns horn 111lt iluion or the rr(lckotf between content and LTitk1 thinking in the lcaching otsliLllcC [n L X row (Edi
(nth II iii hI j(ltIlaquo rpp 17_-) (lshingrotl DC ]11[onll
Scimee (ltrehers AsOl iou ion
Nelson c E (1 )9() Studellt dicrsir rCl]uircs ditknm appro(lLhcs to collqc tcaciling
Cln in math llld sckncc iIIlT(dl Fiehtllltl(ri S((illhl -10 1(1)-1)
Niaz L amp Robinson Xi (1 j)2) IW1l algllrithmic mode [(l Ol1ccprur1 gCs[1lt in
1Il1lkrstanding rill blhavior of gibe An cpiSlclllOiogic11 pcrspccric Rt(Igt ii)(fshy
IIII 0 ic(bliologiCd hhl(iltiOi J(J )5-(H
Ilttry V ( II (I JeD) hJlII ojilferlld tllirl erb(lt r(ICOPJltJ iii tilt ieiln J Idllltll NeW York Holt Rinehart amp iINon
Plucker J A amp kInrire J (1 l9()) lldel11il sllnilbilin ill high-pOIClHill middle school StlldllltS Cifra (hlld I() --1middot1
Rahinmviu 0 CIar R (llJH)) Cq rulturc Ilnd proces in high U)11Pl lent plrr()rmOlllcmiddot In I D Horcmill 0 1 OBrkn ([k) 111 1111r1Ii1fmte4
11 perpeelIlc (PI -)-)8) ahjn~[oil DC rmCIIlCn ycltologkJI
-soc ia[i 0 n
RohimoJl amp Clinkcnbeard l R (1 ))8) Clftcdncss An cxccprlonaiirv examined
AIIlliltl1 RIIicll j) 11- 151
Ruh1I1 L amp RcI S ((()() Pancrn ohdi~rcglliatiotl jl(men of strHcS
lISC 11llOllg I[)v-Khiing mel high-lchicing univnsin sludlHs ROi lt11leu 8 14K-I
Rv(m 1 (I )k+) loniwring [Xl (ol1lprci1lnsion Inciiidud dirkrcllns in
ul gttandards JOIIiIId
SaL U (2004) A npls ()fhiftd adobccnrsoilld
Schummll 1 (I ))l 11 lOllccprualilllriol1 O(CpiSlcllloiogical hdicl~ and thcir
role 011 kamint In R (lrtlCr ( i A Alexander (Lds) dOllIiX( lid ilitJlC
(iOIl Itit tCXI 2i--fOI liillbJc 1 LlTClllC Erlblllll1
Scitorn1l1er 1 amp DUIlIlLil l 1Jrl Epistcmologicti bdd~ or littcd high chuol
studcllls RalIi 19 1-middot1 )(
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
SChOlllll1(
enul
J7I Shieci
d ir )l)-
Shore II
chilei JlIT
Shore H
dllf
i( ) Sowell
1()
i
Span I
Stcinc I
a rmiddot fl]
SrlillC1 i
In Srcrnh~l
L f Slnnh_
(
Suhotl1~
fhollLh
ch
11lt 111 __
~ ~ tcshy
ri
choo
DESICNED FiT
Schommer-AikinsL Duell 0 K amp Hurter R (2005) Epistemological mathshy
emarical probkm-solving beliefs and academic of middle school students
Ihe 105289-304 Shieer S amp ]1aker C J 199-) Enrichment and acceleration An meniew 1I1d new
directions In ~ Colangelo amp C Davis Haildboo edllcation 99-110) Boston Allm amp Bacon
Shore B M (2000) ktacognitiol1 and Hexibilitmiddot differences in how gifted
children think In R C Friedman amp B 1 Shore (Elk) rllllts ulljf)dillg CogshylIitioli and dlleopllllt 16--1Sn vrashil1gton DC American PsChological
Association
Shore B 1 amp Irving J (200j) Inquirv as a Il(dagogicallink hetween expnie lnc
giftedness111e lbili( lI1d inquin resc1ch group at 1cCili Lnhmiddotcrir
fwd tofld IlIteliirUllilidl O( 1)5-40
Shore B fL amp Lazar 1 (1996) differences in time alltlcatiol1 Irhlc-m
-8 11411-S49
Sowell L R 1cters()ll B S lhol11pon P 1 e1cuIllLmiddot S [ Il~nklt nill L amp lc)gl A V (2003l bpping cortical Cross rhe human lit~ pan MUIII
iVmoicillIr( () 309-51 i
Span )1 amp Oertool11-COrSIll iL R (19H6) Informatioll ng hmiddot intellectual
pupils sullillg Illarhcmuical prohlems Frill(tlliolldl Stil 1 Alarfeillrltio -
273-291 SteineL H H amp Carr 1 12(05) C
more preci undersundinf of Hrclgr RIIiCli 15 21)-21
denmiddotlopl11lnt in children Toward
di fferenccs ill i mel Iigencl Ldi(tltlOlIr
Stcimmiddotr H H amp Clrr 1 (200() 1 r(ldolIIl11t oproJIeil -ollilI Iii gijicrl lllirl Ilmgl~iiil) (fidllll lc(rr(J liml d(fo(illiilt to edliCtiolliI
I-bllppauge lY Ioa Science
Srnnbcrg R J (Ed) (191-12) flIIrll)(o ahliililll illllllgolec ~e York Cambridge
Unlnsir Press
StLrnberg RI (2()()~ L hroJd ie or il1telligencefllc thl(l~ of sllcccssful
COllilltilig lotrildmiddot Jritti(1 illlt R(tllc 55 15)-1 i-l
Sllbotnik R F (2()(Ul doicC1[ pathway to lmll1LIllC ill seicnlL Lcsom irom the
music COIlSLratoIY III P CLTmch- amp L ledcrlllltln (hisl SUOi([ (rII(lItioll [tllII
rnmitllloi( i1Hd pllblli 2)i-502) Burke lOS Pre
lhonl1sI- (200S) RCiing and
ethnicity Il()n~ gifted high SdlOUI sllIdcJl(
Wluing 1 (1989) Logical IllCe-sln to mlkc line graphs j(llnldl itl middotcima J( 3-1-3 -q
Veins[Ock 1 )culllan Y amp iaiuk 1 2()) I) liing thc point or [hL nomh
of wdcllts to icklltit Ltliaiouo argumiddot I11cnts )( 1) -94
Wilkinson V K amp 1)lt)1 i Ih influencc of collegc stmle-nt
logical Ull clecrlLi to h- i 11 ~ prO(SL~ ([Ier rcb iN UJ~Ji()
Vilkinsoll X K amp Sdmart l II I 9fCllhc oricllLltioll I gittLd
adolcsccnrs 11 tL (d 11[ model Reports hJ r6-l)-k
Young E (2001 hyJun(i rlh l)uildillg blocks ()tlir~ fJ COlriu j(gt--+H
A Guide to Recommended Practices
19
GALLAGHER20
Yurgelun-1()dd D A amp Kilgore X D (2006) harmiddotmiddotre8ted acridt in the prefrontal
cortex increases with age during adolescence A preliminary f1RI study Neuroscience Lmer406194-19()
Zhang L F (J 999) Furrher cross-cultural validation of rill theory of menul self-governshymenr journal 133 16)-1)1
Zhang L F amp atkins D (200 II Cognitivc dcvcloplllll1t llld stUdcnt approaches to
learning An investigation ofPerns theor~ vith Clullcse and US uniersitv students Higher EduCfltiol1 41239-2(1
SUSANr
We
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
11 DESIGNED TO FIT
middot dti t
1 __1
tl
n~
u~url
- l i rlcl
cLnt~
~ leWS
-1-1 be
lll1
Contextual Relativism Unanswered questions are investigated using the
tools provided by each discipline each discipline approaches questions in a different wav Certain amwers are unlikely bur a best ansver can
be achieved using the proper rools
CommitmentDialectic Theories are used [() set directions for imporshy
cam questions most of which have no right or wrong answers Gaining understanding requires building upon the possibilities presented by dara as interpreted by a consciously selected point ofview bur with willingness
to change perspective if rhe need arises (p 436)
l~lble 1 presents the f(lUr stages aligned with the beliefs about learning that Iecomshy
pany each stage For a more concrete example comider Carl and Cedric two students waitshy
ing for class to begin Carl believes rlwt knowledge means fH-rS and being knowledgeable means remembering lots of bets Cedric 011 the other band
thinks that knowledge is the abilitv to combine bcts to create ideas For Cedric
being knowledgeable isnt aboll[ the numher of ElCts he knows its ahout how the [Kts can form and rd()fIll to create diffltrent ideas Their teacher Ms Morshy
gan starts her lecture on the Trail oflCars f()(using on the sequence of even ts
detailing what who and when Carl picks up his pen and starts studiously takshying notes Cedric slumps down in his desk grumbling [lCtoids-lbe two boys
hear the same lccrure bom the same teacher but their ditterent belids abour
knowledge afftC[ bow willing they are to accept the inf()rmation as meaningful or valid
A numher ofrheories nmv artempt to describe aspects ofepistel11ological develshyopment (Baxter 1agolda 1987 King amp Kitchener 1994 Schommer 1994) Each theory describes sequen tiaL developmentalmovemenr from a low or naive stance in which knowledge is equated with flctllal inr()Jmation and memorization to
a high or mature stance in which bets are used ro build theories from a
consciollsly selected point ofview but with willingness w change perspective if the need arises (C~lllagher 2006 p 43(1) In the example above Carl holds a navc
stallce and thu~ is happy to gather up a list of taCtS from the lecture Cedrics stance
is more mature and he wishes the flcts had been embedded in more meaningful ideas
Je ComprelJemizie Irnptlct (1Fpitemgy At one level the impact of Carls
and Cedrics differing heliefs is immediately apparent Students are not like ro learn what the do 110 helilVl to be Illeaningfu-or at least they wont learn it
t()r long After two decades of reselrch into the effeC( of epistemology on karning
it is clear that the impact extends hevond whether students like whl( thl learn to
a number of other important ilCldll1lic Ol[COll1es dCllciemil ilcJitlJcmcnt Using a structural equation
analysis Cano (2005) f()ulld that high school students epistemological stance had
both direct and indirect effects 011 academic achievement Similar results have been
A Guide to Recommended Practices
Stages of Epistemological
Development(3
co Beliefs 3 Associated With the Positionl shyVgt rI)
1 rI) ~
~ -shy
Instruction That C
Matches~
shyshy Epistemological Vgt ngt Stage 0 l- -lt Instruction That Vgt Encourages c shy Movement to a ~ Higher Stage
Earlier Positions
r 0 ~ ~
T 4~ r r r ~
TABLI 1
Perrys StagesPositions of Epistemological Reasoning and Related Instructional Strategies
-
Dualism Multiplicity Relativism
Knowledge is cer- Some questions have I Knowledge is interpreted tam (right or wrong) no certain answers in and unambiquous these cases knowledge
I in context distinguishing better from worse answers
and truth are subjec- Irequires selecting theories Authorities (teachers) live so everyones opinshy Ih b jt he quPtiouknow The Truth ion is eq~llyvalid
Activities that help Practice in comparshy Practice in creating students develop skill ing hypotheses and
comparing and select-
in memorization and theories acknowledgshy ing preferable theoshyrecall mnemonics etc ing all possibilities retical models
in exoert behaviors
Exposure to lems with more than in different disciplines one right answer andl to conduct research or more than one construct theories approach to a solution and make decisions
RanCJe of Typical School Senior
Range of Gifted High School Senior
~ ~ I g C shy ~ n ~ -5 ~ ~ ~ ~ shy
~- ~ ~r r rshy - shyr r l
~ r- r
2-~ r- shy shy
~
r r
I CommitmentDialectic
Knowledge methods are and uncertain Choices require analysis and values
Later Positions
n Z 0 l ln 0r
~ shy~
N
( raquo shyraquo CI J
0
13 DESIGNED TO FIT
found with middle school srudenrs (Schommer-Aikins Duell amp 11l[ter 2005) Studenrs at lower levels may have trouble correcring misconceptions and draw
only fact-based information from inquiry-oriented environments (Ryan ] 984) Epistemological Jtanee aJectJ ildvanced academic performance Students with
more advanced belief have an easier time building logical arguments (Weinstock
Kellman amp Tabak 2(04) they tend to choose thinking strategies that Slipport
deep rather than surface learning (Cano 2005 Zhang amp Watkins 2(01) Kitchshy
enet (1983) also suggested that students selectioll of meracognirive strategies can
be affected by their epis((mologicai beliefs Support for this idea comes from a study by Ruban and Reis (2006) who found that high-achieving students tended
to select cnhancemem oriented learning strategies while lower achieving srudents
selected survival oriented strategies
Illstruction can encourage )WIemem to higber epistemological elcTelChers
can affecr changes in students epistemological thinking through intentionally
structllred learning experiences (Kloss 1094 Kronholm 1993l Strategies recomshy
mended to dCc1op epistemological thinking include using ill-structured problems
and instructional straregics thar allow srudenrs to examine their assumptions anashy
lyze data that present different conHicting perspectiyes and then make decisions
(King amp Kitchener 20(4) Devoting some time to direct instruction about tbe
narure of the discipline helps develop higher levels of reasoning (Bdl 20(4) vhmltltch bet1 iecn instructiol t7 lid epistemoogiCtl Itllnee (pnspect i IJt) colltributes
to jruurrltiol[ (wd disillusiolllJlflll Cedric didnt respond well when Ms Marrin
started a f1Cr-based lecture Over time he will simply decide that school is trivial
or worse meaningless Had Ms 1artin staned imtead with a discllssion of the
violation of Native Americans sense of personhood Cedric wOllld have been
thrilled and Carl would hae been lost This kind of disparity creates barriers to
learning (Nelson 19()6 PelTY 1(70) --Jebel and Schommer-Aikins (2002) f()lnd
that a mismatch between insrruction and stance caused work avoidance among
some high school phYsics students Lovell and lunnefY (2004) ltJUnd that srudents
even found small-group work Illore Itisfing when they Vere grouped according
to sranct (perspecrhc)
Giftrd tlldCIIpound1 tmel to tlJead iii epistemgical dezclopllllllt Stll(iiLs of adoshylescents doculllent that cpistemological belicts mature in a pndioablc dcvelopshy
mental sequcnce (Cano 200) Zhang amp latk ins 2(01) In parallcl to formal
operational reasoning gifred rdoiesccl1t move through episremologicli stges in
the same sequence (Ihomas 2()08) but tend to be a stage or rwo ahead of orlIer
rhe same age (Arlin amp LCirr Il))X Goldberger 1981 Schollll11er I Dunnell
1997 ~n1Omas) 2008 Wilkinsoll I Iaxwcll 1991 iilkinsoll amp Schw~lrtz 19X-1
Lible 1 provides a general seme of the distribution of senior year studcm baSell on existing research
Adult experts tend to holt IlrlzlIIeal epi)tllIIologimlliClls -Ihc epistcl11ojogicri
framework also provides a UHl1lCtiOIl to anuther aspect of experrisc -CIO the
disciplines the behaviors and l([irlllk associared with mature episrel11ologv arc
A Guide to Recommended Practices
[
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
gt ~ ~--------------
GALLAGHER14
considered essential for advanced authentic work (Buehl amp Alexander 2005 Felder 1997 Henderson 1995 Kloss 1994 Muis 20(4)
Connections With G~fted Education Evidence that gifted students tend ro
be somewhat ahead of their age-mates in epistemological development follows
naturally from the data on formal operations reponed above However other
inreresting connections bring this theon into cohesion with existing knowledge
of giftltd students for example there is some indication that people who prlttCr
Intuition on the Jhers-Briggs Type Inventory tend [() have higher epistemologishy
cal stances (Zhang 199()) Cifted rudents overwhelmingly report this prdlrenCl
(Sak 2004) and the connecrion gives further evidencc that giftcd students will
respond best to open-ended inquiry-oriented learning environments Similarly
it explains gifted adolescents positive response to mentOr relationships Like
all adolescents gifted reenagers want to see similarities bcrween themselves and
others in mentors they find kindred spirits who think abour ideas from similar
frames of mind
Most exciting perhaps is the COil necrion between epistell1oosY md expertise
Not only do gifted students show earlv potential to achieve the expens high levels
of reasoning bur also epistell1ologicalll10deis provide a guide to he p explain how [() move all students closer to authentic higher order reasoning Callagher (l99X) suggested that models slIch as these would make effecdve frameworks for designing
high school curriculum providing an organic model for differentiation Based on
his study of adolescent epistelllological beliefs Cano (200raquo) concurred
it is necessary to take into account nor only students previous knowlshy
edge and learning strategies bur also their learning approaches and
epistemological beliefs Secondlv wc should work directly to try to
enhance [he depth of learning approaches and the complexity of episshy
temological belid~ as way of improving academic achievemenc (p 217)
Finally this framework reinforces the notion that the outcomes tt)r ignorshy
ing srudents beliefs are grave Srudents have trouble accepting the relevance of
instrtlLtion that is out of sync with their stag (Perr- ]970) a finding that is
consonant with the well-established knowledge that gifred adolescents reject munshy
dane repetitive curriculum hlrrher gifted students operating at higher levels than
other students find instrllction orienred towards the majorit uninspiring and
communicate their feelings through underachievement More sltriollsly perhaps
Nelson (1989) cautioned that excessive time spent in low-lenl curriculum actively
builds a wall of habit that blocks the path to higher level reasoning Even rapid
acceleration can havc this d~magillg eftect ifstudenrs are onlv accelerated into nev
low-level content It) prmidl a climl[e read for higher order thinking educators
must present COIltCIH that is accelerated vertically as well as horizomalh-
CI [
tCl ~I
1
lhe IS 110 i I
and fUc
hest n~II
15
bull - r
~ shy
~
~n( )1shy
()f ut I
l1UI1shy
[hm
inti
lpid
DLltiCNEl) TO m
Complete Coherence Evidence-Based Recommendations for
Differentiation in Secondary School
Each of the perspecrivcs considercc1 in this rationale is championed h differshy
ent researchers operating from different paradigms and using differenr research
techniques Even so their respectin findings arc remarkably similar
1 Gifted adolescents nced exposure [0 ~l larger quanrity of coment that
the find dnllenging Beginning at least in middle schooL abstract conshy
tenr should he a srandard part of their curriculum I he importlnle of developing a plenriful high-quality wcll of information i essLlHial as
it is a precursor to using higher order thinking ll1etJcognitivc thinking
and abstract thinking Cifted students will lot adequJtek develop their
thinking skills without this knowledge base 2 A quality knowledge bZlse is neCssary hilt notutticilmiddotllt ItH developing
thinking skilk Ciftecl studenrs 1lUt be presented with Ierning experishy
ences that require them to engage their critical thinking skills and metlshy
cognitive skills If they do not find their assignments challenging their
brains willilot engage their higher order functions T()gether content and
strategv med along ith metacognition predict academic perf()[mltlnce
making the simultalleous devdopmenr of these three paramount
3 Cifted students show earl~ promise t()r deydoping expertise Capitalizi ng
on that earlv promise requires instruction where stlldems Gl1 practice the
qualities of expcrtbe including open-ended imtruction inquiry-based
instruction problcm-oriented instrucrion field experiences and menrorshy
ships all cCl1[ercd 011 high-qualitv disciplinarv or imcrdisciplinary content
Cifted srudents arc most lihk to sec this instruction as relevant and draw
maximum value hom it
4 Expertisc requircs more thall contLflt and skill habits of mind ~llld
~llhaI1C1d epistemological re~lsoning also arc essentiaL If we aspirc for gifted students-~or for allY s(Udel1l~--to hecome creative productive leadshy
ers in their chosen field curriculutH ~lJld instruction should he selected to
develop these simultaneoush- and include exposure to the philosophies
and (thics of thc disciplines
The absence of a qualin- differerlliated secondary progrll11 flH gifted students
is not a neutral position it is 1 choice that will result in deficit skill dCeopmcnt
and student apathy At worr it ill result in the disillusionment some of the
best minds in the country
A Guide to Recommended Practices
i
GALLAGHER16
References
Arlin P K amp Levin L (1998) A deelopmenta perspc((ic on giftedness
HeetlrcIoltnlld I )4~~5i(1 Baxter Jvlagolda Jvl B (J 987) Comparing open-ended inteljcs lnd standardized mea- Hair
sun of inrelieefUal development ollilla Strfmt PCIJoiJle 28 443~44S -i
BdL E (2004) Promoring StUdUHS argumenr consrrncriOll and collahorativc debate in thc Hell science classfl)om rn ~ 1 C Linn E A Davis amp P Bell (Eds J Imimlt J1lrOltrrIOtS h~middot
seimC IIiCilioll (pp 11 i-145) lal11ah 1 Lawrence Erlballl11
rkrningcr V amp Yates C (J (95) Formal operational thought in rhe gifted A postshy H(ln~
Piagetian pnspecriC Hu(ti (nilli I) 220~224 HUN
Rirnn B L (l991 Formal operHional nlsolling Illodes Predictors of critical thinking
abilit ies alld grade assigned Iw reacher in sciencc and nlarhemltltics il[ student in
grades nine rhrough [tke Ollljli ill Sciei( 28 2()-2~4 InhclcL
Buehl 1 amp Alnlnder P (2001) lorivarion and pnr~HlllaJl(e ditferemes in srudelJ[
dOllllin-specific epiSrllllUI()~illt11 bel iet profiles ilIHlIll FdllClitiolfll NCilllrchOII1i
middoti2 (N-- - 2(
ClIlO I (200i) Lpistcl]ologicai bclid~ IJlld a[lproaches to Icllning Ih~ir through lh secol1dan chool wd their influcncc Oil lCademic pn~lrn1alKe Bllti_f lotmil
tdlildtiOllit -) 205- 221 Kanl
ClIl 1 amp Alexander I (I )()6) Xhere giftd children do 1Ild do nO[ cxcel on llleracogshy
n irin lasb Noel) NcriCiI 18 12lt 1( 1)
Cherne L 11 VinrCl J amp Chlrnc j1 l (200i) NucleH problem s()h-ln~ Kanl
elise stUlh of expert-I1Oicl differences hllliSlletoll fI(the iVdmtI of
Seillle w 1-- hi 11 T H (lascL R amp iarr 1 J (itk) (19HHl Ihc Itttn If
NJ Lawrence Erlbaulll King I
CsiksCIHIll ihali 1 1 Ib rJundt K amp Whakn S ( 1 )94) ]tIIIItc tieillgcn 11( mou of I 1 JifCCC-S Iiiirifllllln Bmrou ( PrlmiddotSS ~
[lidson I L amp I I tJ)Hj)lh roll ofimighr in ilwlIeuual ~ifredncs King l
(dial Child (jlltrtal ]8 is-hi dc Urnl 1 amp lLlll~jl 1 11()()iIlhlmiddot riariollshil hcmlln 1biliriLs and slt1rshy
regllbrld Ic~lrning l ilkncc ti) imcraLTiolb with leIck-mil sdt~lomcpt Ild gender
iglllbiit) lirlI ( 2() 1 ) S
Felder R (19~J 1 kCl our s1Udenrs Dac hrrlLl and Ruhcllo ChtlJiicd KItin
Fdll(iltOi31 10(- j() d Cllb~hcr J l-Llrrallilll C ( 0 (olcn1lt1ll ~1 R (J 9F) UlilIkllgc or boredom Ciftld Ii
tlldIHS ics on rhir ((Pi1 NUiCli 19 132~l(1 iI
Callagher S A (l)lt)H 11 he ((lld 10 ulrinl rhinking I he scheille lilt llleH1in~ht KIo I
ditttTcnriation ii Hill(IiII 8li iL)) 12-20 ic Calb~her S 1 (2()()()1 l rhmiddot to slience expcrtiscmiddot In F Dixon amp S Kronl](I
0100[1 ( l IitI)i u (lllllIO1 [PI 1()~middot+6(J) I1U) TX (n
Irufroc k Prns larson 1
CipsoJ] 1 brdulll 1 0 Ic1111ll L t 19S)1 Rcll(ollhil hC[Cll1 t(lrmal-opltTniullll dlOughr and ttllhclrud ditkulrie in geflLtiS problem IUIilidl ofRlsldJ(f ill --I J gt~
Slilll( ( S 1 1--S2 I Loell (
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
17 DESIGNED TO fiT
ul
IX
Gorodetsky 1 amp Klavir R (2003) What can we learn from how giftedaverage pupils
describe their processes of problem solving) Learning amp Instruction 13 305-326 Grabner R Neubauer A amp Srern E (2006) Superior performance and neural efficiencv
Ihe impact of intelligence and expertise Brain Research Bulletin 69 422-439 Haicr R J JUl1g R E Yeo R A Head K amp Alkire M r (200t) Srrllcrural brain
variHion and general inrelligence Netlroimage J L 425-435 Henderson S (J 995) Vh do I hae ro be here) The Advanced Placement srudelH in
firs(~vear composition Problems and isslles in cognitive development journal ondar) Gifted EduCtlri(Jl 7 )24-532
Hong L (19)9) Swdying the mind of rhe gifted ROfper Relieu 21 244-2)2 Hurst R amp Milkenr 11 (1996) Facilitaring successful prediccion problem gt(living in
biology through application ofskill theor jOllnJal ill Scimce ) 541-)52
Inhclder fl amp Piager j (19)8) the cililrflIor1I IlrO-fi((
Jew York Basic fI()oks
Jarvin L amp Subomik R (2006) Understanding elitc taient ill acadcmil domaim A
dcvclopmcl1(al ttajccwn from hasic ahilities O scholarlv producrivitvcmisfr In E A Dixon amp S 1 Moon (Eek) thc hillidbook (pp205-220) vhco TX Prufrock Press
Kancsky L (1)92) Gifred children and thc learning process Imights on both tlom rhe
rcsearch III E Miinks amp Xi Peters (Eds) J(tlmr r1( (pp 1))middot161) Asscn
Ihe 0lctherlands Van CorClUll
Kanevsky L amp KeighlcvL (2003) 1~) produce or nor ro produce understanding hOi dum and the honor in umkrlchkl111cnr RCIitll26 2()2R
Kauflll]n J C Gentile C r amp Bllf J (200)) Do gifted sflllknr writers and crec)(ive
writing experts raIL lTlcni in till same Child QlltlltCrl 4) 2()O-265 King P v1 amp Kitchener K S (1)94) jll(zr1II IllI
flild illtcllltfli ill flrocsCm fllld (lIn San
Francisco Josse~ Bass
King l 1 amp Kitchencr K S (2004) Iefieltivc judgllllm Ihcorv and research on thl
dtveioplllelH ()f pircmic assllmptions through adulrhood Fdilolfiolltll
YJ(I) )-lR
Kitchener K S (1 )HI) Cogllition Il1ctalugnirioll and episttmic cognition A rhrcltlevel
model of cognitivc pnllc fl1I11II11I )11 dOjJ 1IItl1 I 6 222~252 Klein J T (I ))3) Blurring CLIcking mel crossing Permcation and thc fracturing of
discipline In E lesscr-DlidO D R ShUlllV amp D J Shan (Eds) (Pl 1 Hi-21 I) Charlnwsdle Uniersin
of Virginia Press
Kloss R J (19)4) nudge is hest Helping srudems throllgh rhe Iern schellll of intll
Iccruat Jeel0pllhnr I] I i 1-1 lH
Kronholm M 1 (19J) l Ihe i mp)ct of dCIdnpmenral instruction on rcHen ill iudgmellL
RCIieU ofHigber ErlIldtillll I i 1))-middot2)) Larson R V amp Richmk 1 11 1 L)J 1 ugusr) Boredom in (hi middle scilll() I
ears Blaming schoolgt erus gtIamitlg mdenrs 1l11encdll jOIiJIiI OjliJI(I[JOII 9)
418-44) Lmell C X amp 0unnen j i 2()()i i Tesling the adulr dCelopme1( I()CI of [lahel
hvpothesis HOI1l0gillCOll hmiddot lln position mllaboldtile learning groups and grcldu
ate student sarisfanion tllrtr 11 IY) 1)0
A Guide to Recommended Practices
L GtgtLlA(HER18
Ludlow B L amp Voodrum D T (1)82) Problem-sohing and aerag~
Icarners on a multiple discrimination task (ild
Matthews D amp lkLwghlin T 1)94) EHects otleHIlr-cclHcln acthitics on
achievement and students preterences in [So hiih 5c11Ol lLtrSes HI(tPWdl
fllld AOo)li -8 28)-286 ivlcDonJkl J (I )Kl) Cogniric dcnlopmenr Jnd the rlUdU or geometric contcllr
Rlslrd ill f(ltbcJlldti f((cilwm 20 -11-)4
vlontlgue 1 (19() 1 J Cihnl and Icnning diabkd gifrcd smdllls lise of knowledge and
usc of mrriHIllHicli and prohlem sohing srrarcgic I I(uuioll oftII
11 Y))-+II
middotluis K (2004) ierson(rl cpisrcmologv and marhcmuics - critical rcic and smhesis
of research RcIlli lifdll(lIli()Ii Retii -1 31--3-- Neher H amp Scholllnllr-middotikim 1 (20021 Sclf-regubted ilIKC with hiohl
gitted students l11e rok of cogn it i l l110t i UiOll] L pist cillologicd md cm [ron l1](llshy
[11 (1liahle linif Stili lin 3( I i iC)_-I
Nelson C E (I )8)) Skcwered on th unicorns horn 111lt iluion or the rr(lckotf between content and LTitk1 thinking in the lcaching otsliLllcC [n L X row (Edi
(nth II iii hI j(ltIlaquo rpp 17_-) (lshingrotl DC ]11[onll
Scimee (ltrehers AsOl iou ion
Nelson c E (1 )9() Studellt dicrsir rCl]uircs ditknm appro(lLhcs to collqc tcaciling
Cln in math llld sckncc iIIlT(dl Fiehtllltl(ri S((illhl -10 1(1)-1)
Niaz L amp Robinson Xi (1 j)2) IW1l algllrithmic mode [(l Ol1ccprur1 gCs[1lt in
1Il1lkrstanding rill blhavior of gibe An cpiSlclllOiogic11 pcrspccric Rt(Igt ii)(fshy
IIII 0 ic(bliologiCd hhl(iltiOi J(J )5-(H
Ilttry V ( II (I JeD) hJlII ojilferlld tllirl erb(lt r(ICOPJltJ iii tilt ieiln J Idllltll NeW York Holt Rinehart amp iINon
Plucker J A amp kInrire J (1 l9()) lldel11il sllnilbilin ill high-pOIClHill middle school StlldllltS Cifra (hlld I() --1middot1
Rahinmviu 0 CIar R (llJH)) Cq rulturc Ilnd proces in high U)11Pl lent plrr()rmOlllcmiddot In I D Horcmill 0 1 OBrkn ([k) 111 1111r1Ii1fmte4
11 perpeelIlc (PI -)-)8) ahjn~[oil DC rmCIIlCn ycltologkJI
-soc ia[i 0 n
RohimoJl amp Clinkcnbeard l R (1 ))8) Clftcdncss An cxccprlonaiirv examined
AIIlliltl1 RIIicll j) 11- 151
Ruh1I1 L amp RcI S ((()() Pancrn ohdi~rcglliatiotl jl(men of strHcS
lISC 11llOllg I[)v-Khiing mel high-lchicing univnsin sludlHs ROi lt11leu 8 14K-I
Rv(m 1 (I )k+) loniwring [Xl (ol1lprci1lnsion Inciiidud dirkrcllns in
ul gttandards JOIIiIId
SaL U (2004) A npls ()fhiftd adobccnrsoilld
Schummll 1 (I ))l 11 lOllccprualilllriol1 O(CpiSlcllloiogical hdicl~ and thcir
role 011 kamint In R (lrtlCr ( i A Alexander (Lds) dOllIiX( lid ilitJlC
(iOIl Itit tCXI 2i--fOI liillbJc 1 LlTClllC Erlblllll1
Scitorn1l1er 1 amp DUIlIlLil l 1Jrl Epistcmologicti bdd~ or littcd high chuol
studcllls RalIi 19 1-middot1 )(
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
SChOlllll1(
enul
J7I Shieci
d ir )l)-
Shore II
chilei JlIT
Shore H
dllf
i( ) Sowell
1()
i
Span I
Stcinc I
a rmiddot fl]
SrlillC1 i
In Srcrnh~l
L f Slnnh_
(
Suhotl1~
fhollLh
ch
11lt 111 __
~ ~ tcshy
ri
choo
DESICNED FiT
Schommer-AikinsL Duell 0 K amp Hurter R (2005) Epistemological mathshy
emarical probkm-solving beliefs and academic of middle school students
Ihe 105289-304 Shieer S amp ]1aker C J 199-) Enrichment and acceleration An meniew 1I1d new
directions In ~ Colangelo amp C Davis Haildboo edllcation 99-110) Boston Allm amp Bacon
Shore B M (2000) ktacognitiol1 and Hexibilitmiddot differences in how gifted
children think In R C Friedman amp B 1 Shore (Elk) rllllts ulljf)dillg CogshylIitioli and dlleopllllt 16--1Sn vrashil1gton DC American PsChological
Association
Shore B 1 amp Irving J (200j) Inquirv as a Il(dagogicallink hetween expnie lnc
giftedness111e lbili( lI1d inquin resc1ch group at 1cCili Lnhmiddotcrir
fwd tofld IlIteliirUllilidl O( 1)5-40
Shore B fL amp Lazar 1 (1996) differences in time alltlcatiol1 Irhlc-m
-8 11411-S49
Sowell L R 1cters()ll B S lhol11pon P 1 e1cuIllLmiddot S [ Il~nklt nill L amp lc)gl A V (2003l bpping cortical Cross rhe human lit~ pan MUIII
iVmoicillIr( () 309-51 i
Span )1 amp Oertool11-COrSIll iL R (19H6) Informatioll ng hmiddot intellectual
pupils sullillg Illarhcmuical prohlems Frill(tlliolldl Stil 1 Alarfeillrltio -
273-291 SteineL H H amp Carr 1 12(05) C
more preci undersundinf of Hrclgr RIIiCli 15 21)-21
denmiddotlopl11lnt in children Toward
di fferenccs ill i mel Iigencl Ldi(tltlOlIr
Stcimmiddotr H H amp Clrr 1 (200() 1 r(ldolIIl11t oproJIeil -ollilI Iii gijicrl lllirl Ilmgl~iiil) (fidllll lc(rr(J liml d(fo(illiilt to edliCtiolliI
I-bllppauge lY Ioa Science
Srnnbcrg R J (Ed) (191-12) flIIrll)(o ahliililll illllllgolec ~e York Cambridge
Unlnsir Press
StLrnberg RI (2()()~ L hroJd ie or il1telligencefllc thl(l~ of sllcccssful
COllilltilig lotrildmiddot Jritti(1 illlt R(tllc 55 15)-1 i-l
Sllbotnik R F (2()(Ul doicC1[ pathway to lmll1LIllC ill seicnlL Lcsom irom the
music COIlSLratoIY III P CLTmch- amp L ledcrlllltln (hisl SUOi([ (rII(lItioll [tllII
rnmitllloi( i1Hd pllblli 2)i-502) Burke lOS Pre
lhonl1sI- (200S) RCiing and
ethnicity Il()n~ gifted high SdlOUI sllIdcJl(
Wluing 1 (1989) Logical IllCe-sln to mlkc line graphs j(llnldl itl middotcima J( 3-1-3 -q
Veins[Ock 1 )culllan Y amp iaiuk 1 2()) I) liing thc point or [hL nomh
of wdcllts to icklltit Ltliaiouo argumiddot I11cnts )( 1) -94
Wilkinson V K amp 1)lt)1 i Ih influencc of collegc stmle-nt
logical Ull clecrlLi to h- i 11 ~ prO(SL~ ([Ier rcb iN UJ~Ji()
Vilkinsoll X K amp Sdmart l II I 9fCllhc oricllLltioll I gittLd
adolcsccnrs 11 tL (d 11[ model Reports hJ r6-l)-k
Young E (2001 hyJun(i rlh l)uildillg blocks ()tlir~ fJ COlriu j(gt--+H
A Guide to Recommended Practices
19
GALLAGHER20
Yurgelun-1()dd D A amp Kilgore X D (2006) harmiddotmiddotre8ted acridt in the prefrontal
cortex increases with age during adolescence A preliminary f1RI study Neuroscience Lmer406194-19()
Zhang L F (J 999) Furrher cross-cultural validation of rill theory of menul self-governshymenr journal 133 16)-1)1
Zhang L F amp atkins D (200 II Cognitivc dcvcloplllll1t llld stUdcnt approaches to
learning An investigation ofPerns theor~ vith Clullcse and US uniersitv students Higher EduCfltiol1 41239-2(1
SUSANr
We
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
Stages of Epistemological
Development(3
co Beliefs 3 Associated With the Positionl shyVgt rI)
1 rI) ~
~ -shy
Instruction That C
Matches~
shyshy Epistemological Vgt ngt Stage 0 l- -lt Instruction That Vgt Encourages c shy Movement to a ~ Higher Stage
Earlier Positions
r 0 ~ ~
T 4~ r r r ~
TABLI 1
Perrys StagesPositions of Epistemological Reasoning and Related Instructional Strategies
-
Dualism Multiplicity Relativism
Knowledge is cer- Some questions have I Knowledge is interpreted tam (right or wrong) no certain answers in and unambiquous these cases knowledge
I in context distinguishing better from worse answers
and truth are subjec- Irequires selecting theories Authorities (teachers) live so everyones opinshy Ih b jt he quPtiouknow The Truth ion is eq~llyvalid
Activities that help Practice in comparshy Practice in creating students develop skill ing hypotheses and
comparing and select-
in memorization and theories acknowledgshy ing preferable theoshyrecall mnemonics etc ing all possibilities retical models
in exoert behaviors
Exposure to lems with more than in different disciplines one right answer andl to conduct research or more than one construct theories approach to a solution and make decisions
RanCJe of Typical School Senior
Range of Gifted High School Senior
~ ~ I g C shy ~ n ~ -5 ~ ~ ~ ~ shy
~- ~ ~r r rshy - shyr r l
~ r- r
2-~ r- shy shy
~
r r
I CommitmentDialectic
Knowledge methods are and uncertain Choices require analysis and values
Later Positions
n Z 0 l ln 0r
~ shy~
N
( raquo shyraquo CI J
0
13 DESIGNED TO FIT
found with middle school srudenrs (Schommer-Aikins Duell amp 11l[ter 2005) Studenrs at lower levels may have trouble correcring misconceptions and draw
only fact-based information from inquiry-oriented environments (Ryan ] 984) Epistemological Jtanee aJectJ ildvanced academic performance Students with
more advanced belief have an easier time building logical arguments (Weinstock
Kellman amp Tabak 2(04) they tend to choose thinking strategies that Slipport
deep rather than surface learning (Cano 2005 Zhang amp Watkins 2(01) Kitchshy
enet (1983) also suggested that students selectioll of meracognirive strategies can
be affected by their epis((mologicai beliefs Support for this idea comes from a study by Ruban and Reis (2006) who found that high-achieving students tended
to select cnhancemem oriented learning strategies while lower achieving srudents
selected survival oriented strategies
Illstruction can encourage )WIemem to higber epistemological elcTelChers
can affecr changes in students epistemological thinking through intentionally
structllred learning experiences (Kloss 1094 Kronholm 1993l Strategies recomshy
mended to dCc1op epistemological thinking include using ill-structured problems
and instructional straregics thar allow srudenrs to examine their assumptions anashy
lyze data that present different conHicting perspectiyes and then make decisions
(King amp Kitchener 20(4) Devoting some time to direct instruction about tbe
narure of the discipline helps develop higher levels of reasoning (Bdl 20(4) vhmltltch bet1 iecn instructiol t7 lid epistemoogiCtl Itllnee (pnspect i IJt) colltributes
to jruurrltiol[ (wd disillusiolllJlflll Cedric didnt respond well when Ms Marrin
started a f1Cr-based lecture Over time he will simply decide that school is trivial
or worse meaningless Had Ms 1artin staned imtead with a discllssion of the
violation of Native Americans sense of personhood Cedric wOllld have been
thrilled and Carl would hae been lost This kind of disparity creates barriers to
learning (Nelson 19()6 PelTY 1(70) --Jebel and Schommer-Aikins (2002) f()lnd
that a mismatch between insrruction and stance caused work avoidance among
some high school phYsics students Lovell and lunnefY (2004) ltJUnd that srudents
even found small-group work Illore Itisfing when they Vere grouped according
to sranct (perspecrhc)
Giftrd tlldCIIpound1 tmel to tlJead iii epistemgical dezclopllllllt Stll(iiLs of adoshylescents doculllent that cpistemological belicts mature in a pndioablc dcvelopshy
mental sequcnce (Cano 200) Zhang amp latk ins 2(01) In parallcl to formal
operational reasoning gifred rdoiesccl1t move through episremologicli stges in
the same sequence (Ihomas 2()08) but tend to be a stage or rwo ahead of orlIer
rhe same age (Arlin amp LCirr Il))X Goldberger 1981 Schollll11er I Dunnell
1997 ~n1Omas) 2008 Wilkinsoll I Iaxwcll 1991 iilkinsoll amp Schw~lrtz 19X-1
Lible 1 provides a general seme of the distribution of senior year studcm baSell on existing research
Adult experts tend to holt IlrlzlIIeal epi)tllIIologimlliClls -Ihc epistcl11ojogicri
framework also provides a UHl1lCtiOIl to anuther aspect of experrisc -CIO the
disciplines the behaviors and l([irlllk associared with mature episrel11ologv arc
A Guide to Recommended Practices
[
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
gt ~ ~--------------
GALLAGHER14
considered essential for advanced authentic work (Buehl amp Alexander 2005 Felder 1997 Henderson 1995 Kloss 1994 Muis 20(4)
Connections With G~fted Education Evidence that gifted students tend ro
be somewhat ahead of their age-mates in epistemological development follows
naturally from the data on formal operations reponed above However other
inreresting connections bring this theon into cohesion with existing knowledge
of giftltd students for example there is some indication that people who prlttCr
Intuition on the Jhers-Briggs Type Inventory tend [() have higher epistemologishy
cal stances (Zhang 199()) Cifted rudents overwhelmingly report this prdlrenCl
(Sak 2004) and the connecrion gives further evidencc that giftcd students will
respond best to open-ended inquiry-oriented learning environments Similarly
it explains gifted adolescents positive response to mentOr relationships Like
all adolescents gifted reenagers want to see similarities bcrween themselves and
others in mentors they find kindred spirits who think abour ideas from similar
frames of mind
Most exciting perhaps is the COil necrion between epistell1oosY md expertise
Not only do gifted students show earlv potential to achieve the expens high levels
of reasoning bur also epistell1ologicalll10deis provide a guide to he p explain how [() move all students closer to authentic higher order reasoning Callagher (l99X) suggested that models slIch as these would make effecdve frameworks for designing
high school curriculum providing an organic model for differentiation Based on
his study of adolescent epistelllological beliefs Cano (200raquo) concurred
it is necessary to take into account nor only students previous knowlshy
edge and learning strategies bur also their learning approaches and
epistemological beliefs Secondlv wc should work directly to try to
enhance [he depth of learning approaches and the complexity of episshy
temological belid~ as way of improving academic achievemenc (p 217)
Finally this framework reinforces the notion that the outcomes tt)r ignorshy
ing srudents beliefs are grave Srudents have trouble accepting the relevance of
instrtlLtion that is out of sync with their stag (Perr- ]970) a finding that is
consonant with the well-established knowledge that gifred adolescents reject munshy
dane repetitive curriculum hlrrher gifted students operating at higher levels than
other students find instrllction orienred towards the majorit uninspiring and
communicate their feelings through underachievement More sltriollsly perhaps
Nelson (1989) cautioned that excessive time spent in low-lenl curriculum actively
builds a wall of habit that blocks the path to higher level reasoning Even rapid
acceleration can havc this d~magillg eftect ifstudenrs are onlv accelerated into nev
low-level content It) prmidl a climl[e read for higher order thinking educators
must present COIltCIH that is accelerated vertically as well as horizomalh-
CI [
tCl ~I
1
lhe IS 110 i I
and fUc
hest n~II
15
bull - r
~ shy
~
~n( )1shy
()f ut I
l1UI1shy
[hm
inti
lpid
DLltiCNEl) TO m
Complete Coherence Evidence-Based Recommendations for
Differentiation in Secondary School
Each of the perspecrivcs considercc1 in this rationale is championed h differshy
ent researchers operating from different paradigms and using differenr research
techniques Even so their respectin findings arc remarkably similar
1 Gifted adolescents nced exposure [0 ~l larger quanrity of coment that
the find dnllenging Beginning at least in middle schooL abstract conshy
tenr should he a srandard part of their curriculum I he importlnle of developing a plenriful high-quality wcll of information i essLlHial as
it is a precursor to using higher order thinking ll1etJcognitivc thinking
and abstract thinking Cifted students will lot adequJtek develop their
thinking skills without this knowledge base 2 A quality knowledge bZlse is neCssary hilt notutticilmiddotllt ItH developing
thinking skilk Ciftecl studenrs 1lUt be presented with Ierning experishy
ences that require them to engage their critical thinking skills and metlshy
cognitive skills If they do not find their assignments challenging their
brains willilot engage their higher order functions T()gether content and
strategv med along ith metacognition predict academic perf()[mltlnce
making the simultalleous devdopmenr of these three paramount
3 Cifted students show earl~ promise t()r deydoping expertise Capitalizi ng
on that earlv promise requires instruction where stlldems Gl1 practice the
qualities of expcrtbe including open-ended imtruction inquiry-based
instruction problcm-oriented instrucrion field experiences and menrorshy
ships all cCl1[ercd 011 high-qualitv disciplinarv or imcrdisciplinary content
Cifted srudents arc most lihk to sec this instruction as relevant and draw
maximum value hom it
4 Expertisc requircs more thall contLflt and skill habits of mind ~llld
~llhaI1C1d epistemological re~lsoning also arc essentiaL If we aspirc for gifted students-~or for allY s(Udel1l~--to hecome creative productive leadshy
ers in their chosen field curriculutH ~lJld instruction should he selected to
develop these simultaneoush- and include exposure to the philosophies
and (thics of thc disciplines
The absence of a qualin- differerlliated secondary progrll11 flH gifted students
is not a neutral position it is 1 choice that will result in deficit skill dCeopmcnt
and student apathy At worr it ill result in the disillusionment some of the
best minds in the country
A Guide to Recommended Practices
i
GALLAGHER16
References
Arlin P K amp Levin L (1998) A deelopmenta perspc((ic on giftedness
HeetlrcIoltnlld I )4~~5i(1 Baxter Jvlagolda Jvl B (J 987) Comparing open-ended inteljcs lnd standardized mea- Hair
sun of inrelieefUal development ollilla Strfmt PCIJoiJle 28 443~44S -i
BdL E (2004) Promoring StUdUHS argumenr consrrncriOll and collahorativc debate in thc Hell science classfl)om rn ~ 1 C Linn E A Davis amp P Bell (Eds J Imimlt J1lrOltrrIOtS h~middot
seimC IIiCilioll (pp 11 i-145) lal11ah 1 Lawrence Erlballl11
rkrningcr V amp Yates C (J (95) Formal operational thought in rhe gifted A postshy H(ln~
Piagetian pnspecriC Hu(ti (nilli I) 220~224 HUN
Rirnn B L (l991 Formal operHional nlsolling Illodes Predictors of critical thinking
abilit ies alld grade assigned Iw reacher in sciencc and nlarhemltltics il[ student in
grades nine rhrough [tke Ollljli ill Sciei( 28 2()-2~4 InhclcL
Buehl 1 amp Alnlnder P (2001) lorivarion and pnr~HlllaJl(e ditferemes in srudelJ[
dOllllin-specific epiSrllllUI()~illt11 bel iet profiles ilIHlIll FdllClitiolfll NCilllrchOII1i
middoti2 (N-- - 2(
ClIlO I (200i) Lpistcl]ologicai bclid~ IJlld a[lproaches to Icllning Ih~ir through lh secol1dan chool wd their influcncc Oil lCademic pn~lrn1alKe Bllti_f lotmil
tdlildtiOllit -) 205- 221 Kanl
ClIl 1 amp Alexander I (I )()6) Xhere giftd children do 1Ild do nO[ cxcel on llleracogshy
n irin lasb Noel) NcriCiI 18 12lt 1( 1)
Cherne L 11 VinrCl J amp Chlrnc j1 l (200i) NucleH problem s()h-ln~ Kanl
elise stUlh of expert-I1Oicl differences hllliSlletoll fI(the iVdmtI of
Seillle w 1-- hi 11 T H (lascL R amp iarr 1 J (itk) (19HHl Ihc Itttn If
NJ Lawrence Erlbaulll King I
CsiksCIHIll ihali 1 1 Ib rJundt K amp Whakn S ( 1 )94) ]tIIIItc tieillgcn 11( mou of I 1 JifCCC-S Iiiirifllllln Bmrou ( PrlmiddotSS ~
[lidson I L amp I I tJ)Hj)lh roll ofimighr in ilwlIeuual ~ifredncs King l
(dial Child (jlltrtal ]8 is-hi dc Urnl 1 amp lLlll~jl 1 11()()iIlhlmiddot riariollshil hcmlln 1biliriLs and slt1rshy
regllbrld Ic~lrning l ilkncc ti) imcraLTiolb with leIck-mil sdt~lomcpt Ild gender
iglllbiit) lirlI ( 2() 1 ) S
Felder R (19~J 1 kCl our s1Udenrs Dac hrrlLl and Ruhcllo ChtlJiicd KItin
Fdll(iltOi31 10(- j() d Cllb~hcr J l-Llrrallilll C ( 0 (olcn1lt1ll ~1 R (J 9F) UlilIkllgc or boredom Ciftld Ii
tlldIHS ics on rhir ((Pi1 NUiCli 19 132~l(1 iI
Callagher S A (l)lt)H 11 he ((lld 10 ulrinl rhinking I he scheille lilt llleH1in~ht KIo I
ditttTcnriation ii Hill(IiII 8li iL)) 12-20 ic Calb~her S 1 (2()()()1 l rhmiddot to slience expcrtiscmiddot In F Dixon amp S Kronl](I
0100[1 ( l IitI)i u (lllllIO1 [PI 1()~middot+6(J) I1U) TX (n
Irufroc k Prns larson 1
CipsoJ] 1 brdulll 1 0 Ic1111ll L t 19S)1 Rcll(ollhil hC[Cll1 t(lrmal-opltTniullll dlOughr and ttllhclrud ditkulrie in geflLtiS problem IUIilidl ofRlsldJ(f ill --I J gt~
Slilll( ( S 1 1--S2 I Loell (
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
17 DESIGNED TO fiT
ul
IX
Gorodetsky 1 amp Klavir R (2003) What can we learn from how giftedaverage pupils
describe their processes of problem solving) Learning amp Instruction 13 305-326 Grabner R Neubauer A amp Srern E (2006) Superior performance and neural efficiencv
Ihe impact of intelligence and expertise Brain Research Bulletin 69 422-439 Haicr R J JUl1g R E Yeo R A Head K amp Alkire M r (200t) Srrllcrural brain
variHion and general inrelligence Netlroimage J L 425-435 Henderson S (J 995) Vh do I hae ro be here) The Advanced Placement srudelH in
firs(~vear composition Problems and isslles in cognitive development journal ondar) Gifted EduCtlri(Jl 7 )24-532
Hong L (19)9) Swdying the mind of rhe gifted ROfper Relieu 21 244-2)2 Hurst R amp Milkenr 11 (1996) Facilitaring successful prediccion problem gt(living in
biology through application ofskill theor jOllnJal ill Scimce ) 541-)52
Inhclder fl amp Piager j (19)8) the cililrflIor1I IlrO-fi((
Jew York Basic fI()oks
Jarvin L amp Subomik R (2006) Understanding elitc taient ill acadcmil domaim A
dcvclopmcl1(al ttajccwn from hasic ahilities O scholarlv producrivitvcmisfr In E A Dixon amp S 1 Moon (Eek) thc hillidbook (pp205-220) vhco TX Prufrock Press
Kancsky L (1)92) Gifred children and thc learning process Imights on both tlom rhe
rcsearch III E Miinks amp Xi Peters (Eds) J(tlmr r1( (pp 1))middot161) Asscn
Ihe 0lctherlands Van CorClUll
Kanevsky L amp KeighlcvL (2003) 1~) produce or nor ro produce understanding hOi dum and the honor in umkrlchkl111cnr RCIitll26 2()2R
Kauflll]n J C Gentile C r amp Bllf J (200)) Do gifted sflllknr writers and crec)(ive
writing experts raIL lTlcni in till same Child QlltlltCrl 4) 2()O-265 King P v1 amp Kitchener K S (1)94) jll(zr1II IllI
flild illtcllltfli ill flrocsCm fllld (lIn San
Francisco Josse~ Bass
King l 1 amp Kitchencr K S (2004) Iefieltivc judgllllm Ihcorv and research on thl
dtveioplllelH ()f pircmic assllmptions through adulrhood Fdilolfiolltll
YJ(I) )-lR
Kitchener K S (1 )HI) Cogllition Il1ctalugnirioll and episttmic cognition A rhrcltlevel
model of cognitivc pnllc fl1I11II11I )11 dOjJ 1IItl1 I 6 222~252 Klein J T (I ))3) Blurring CLIcking mel crossing Permcation and thc fracturing of
discipline In E lesscr-DlidO D R ShUlllV amp D J Shan (Eds) (Pl 1 Hi-21 I) Charlnwsdle Uniersin
of Virginia Press
Kloss R J (19)4) nudge is hest Helping srudems throllgh rhe Iern schellll of intll
Iccruat Jeel0pllhnr I] I i 1-1 lH
Kronholm M 1 (19J) l Ihe i mp)ct of dCIdnpmenral instruction on rcHen ill iudgmellL
RCIieU ofHigber ErlIldtillll I i 1))-middot2)) Larson R V amp Richmk 1 11 1 L)J 1 ugusr) Boredom in (hi middle scilll() I
ears Blaming schoolgt erus gtIamitlg mdenrs 1l11encdll jOIiJIiI OjliJI(I[JOII 9)
418-44) Lmell C X amp 0unnen j i 2()()i i Tesling the adulr dCelopme1( I()CI of [lahel
hvpothesis HOI1l0gillCOll hmiddot lln position mllaboldtile learning groups and grcldu
ate student sarisfanion tllrtr 11 IY) 1)0
A Guide to Recommended Practices
L GtgtLlA(HER18
Ludlow B L amp Voodrum D T (1)82) Problem-sohing and aerag~
Icarners on a multiple discrimination task (ild
Matthews D amp lkLwghlin T 1)94) EHects otleHIlr-cclHcln acthitics on
achievement and students preterences in [So hiih 5c11Ol lLtrSes HI(tPWdl
fllld AOo)li -8 28)-286 ivlcDonJkl J (I )Kl) Cogniric dcnlopmenr Jnd the rlUdU or geometric contcllr
Rlslrd ill f(ltbcJlldti f((cilwm 20 -11-)4
vlontlgue 1 (19() 1 J Cihnl and Icnning diabkd gifrcd smdllls lise of knowledge and
usc of mrriHIllHicli and prohlem sohing srrarcgic I I(uuioll oftII
11 Y))-+II
middotluis K (2004) ierson(rl cpisrcmologv and marhcmuics - critical rcic and smhesis
of research RcIlli lifdll(lIli()Ii Retii -1 31--3-- Neher H amp Scholllnllr-middotikim 1 (20021 Sclf-regubted ilIKC with hiohl
gitted students l11e rok of cogn it i l l110t i UiOll] L pist cillologicd md cm [ron l1](llshy
[11 (1liahle linif Stili lin 3( I i iC)_-I
Nelson C E (I )8)) Skcwered on th unicorns horn 111lt iluion or the rr(lckotf between content and LTitk1 thinking in the lcaching otsliLllcC [n L X row (Edi
(nth II iii hI j(ltIlaquo rpp 17_-) (lshingrotl DC ]11[onll
Scimee (ltrehers AsOl iou ion
Nelson c E (1 )9() Studellt dicrsir rCl]uircs ditknm appro(lLhcs to collqc tcaciling
Cln in math llld sckncc iIIlT(dl Fiehtllltl(ri S((illhl -10 1(1)-1)
Niaz L amp Robinson Xi (1 j)2) IW1l algllrithmic mode [(l Ol1ccprur1 gCs[1lt in
1Il1lkrstanding rill blhavior of gibe An cpiSlclllOiogic11 pcrspccric Rt(Igt ii)(fshy
IIII 0 ic(bliologiCd hhl(iltiOi J(J )5-(H
Ilttry V ( II (I JeD) hJlII ojilferlld tllirl erb(lt r(ICOPJltJ iii tilt ieiln J Idllltll NeW York Holt Rinehart amp iINon
Plucker J A amp kInrire J (1 l9()) lldel11il sllnilbilin ill high-pOIClHill middle school StlldllltS Cifra (hlld I() --1middot1
Rahinmviu 0 CIar R (llJH)) Cq rulturc Ilnd proces in high U)11Pl lent plrr()rmOlllcmiddot In I D Horcmill 0 1 OBrkn ([k) 111 1111r1Ii1fmte4
11 perpeelIlc (PI -)-)8) ahjn~[oil DC rmCIIlCn ycltologkJI
-soc ia[i 0 n
RohimoJl amp Clinkcnbeard l R (1 ))8) Clftcdncss An cxccprlonaiirv examined
AIIlliltl1 RIIicll j) 11- 151
Ruh1I1 L amp RcI S ((()() Pancrn ohdi~rcglliatiotl jl(men of strHcS
lISC 11llOllg I[)v-Khiing mel high-lchicing univnsin sludlHs ROi lt11leu 8 14K-I
Rv(m 1 (I )k+) loniwring [Xl (ol1lprci1lnsion Inciiidud dirkrcllns in
ul gttandards JOIIiIId
SaL U (2004) A npls ()fhiftd adobccnrsoilld
Schummll 1 (I ))l 11 lOllccprualilllriol1 O(CpiSlcllloiogical hdicl~ and thcir
role 011 kamint In R (lrtlCr ( i A Alexander (Lds) dOllIiX( lid ilitJlC
(iOIl Itit tCXI 2i--fOI liillbJc 1 LlTClllC Erlblllll1
Scitorn1l1er 1 amp DUIlIlLil l 1Jrl Epistcmologicti bdd~ or littcd high chuol
studcllls RalIi 19 1-middot1 )(
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
SChOlllll1(
enul
J7I Shieci
d ir )l)-
Shore II
chilei JlIT
Shore H
dllf
i( ) Sowell
1()
i
Span I
Stcinc I
a rmiddot fl]
SrlillC1 i
In Srcrnh~l
L f Slnnh_
(
Suhotl1~
fhollLh
ch
11lt 111 __
~ ~ tcshy
ri
choo
DESICNED FiT
Schommer-AikinsL Duell 0 K amp Hurter R (2005) Epistemological mathshy
emarical probkm-solving beliefs and academic of middle school students
Ihe 105289-304 Shieer S amp ]1aker C J 199-) Enrichment and acceleration An meniew 1I1d new
directions In ~ Colangelo amp C Davis Haildboo edllcation 99-110) Boston Allm amp Bacon
Shore B M (2000) ktacognitiol1 and Hexibilitmiddot differences in how gifted
children think In R C Friedman amp B 1 Shore (Elk) rllllts ulljf)dillg CogshylIitioli and dlleopllllt 16--1Sn vrashil1gton DC American PsChological
Association
Shore B 1 amp Irving J (200j) Inquirv as a Il(dagogicallink hetween expnie lnc
giftedness111e lbili( lI1d inquin resc1ch group at 1cCili Lnhmiddotcrir
fwd tofld IlIteliirUllilidl O( 1)5-40
Shore B fL amp Lazar 1 (1996) differences in time alltlcatiol1 Irhlc-m
-8 11411-S49
Sowell L R 1cters()ll B S lhol11pon P 1 e1cuIllLmiddot S [ Il~nklt nill L amp lc)gl A V (2003l bpping cortical Cross rhe human lit~ pan MUIII
iVmoicillIr( () 309-51 i
Span )1 amp Oertool11-COrSIll iL R (19H6) Informatioll ng hmiddot intellectual
pupils sullillg Illarhcmuical prohlems Frill(tlliolldl Stil 1 Alarfeillrltio -
273-291 SteineL H H amp Carr 1 12(05) C
more preci undersundinf of Hrclgr RIIiCli 15 21)-21
denmiddotlopl11lnt in children Toward
di fferenccs ill i mel Iigencl Ldi(tltlOlIr
Stcimmiddotr H H amp Clrr 1 (200() 1 r(ldolIIl11t oproJIeil -ollilI Iii gijicrl lllirl Ilmgl~iiil) (fidllll lc(rr(J liml d(fo(illiilt to edliCtiolliI
I-bllppauge lY Ioa Science
Srnnbcrg R J (Ed) (191-12) flIIrll)(o ahliililll illllllgolec ~e York Cambridge
Unlnsir Press
StLrnberg RI (2()()~ L hroJd ie or il1telligencefllc thl(l~ of sllcccssful
COllilltilig lotrildmiddot Jritti(1 illlt R(tllc 55 15)-1 i-l
Sllbotnik R F (2()(Ul doicC1[ pathway to lmll1LIllC ill seicnlL Lcsom irom the
music COIlSLratoIY III P CLTmch- amp L ledcrlllltln (hisl SUOi([ (rII(lItioll [tllII
rnmitllloi( i1Hd pllblli 2)i-502) Burke lOS Pre
lhonl1sI- (200S) RCiing and
ethnicity Il()n~ gifted high SdlOUI sllIdcJl(
Wluing 1 (1989) Logical IllCe-sln to mlkc line graphs j(llnldl itl middotcima J( 3-1-3 -q
Veins[Ock 1 )culllan Y amp iaiuk 1 2()) I) liing thc point or [hL nomh
of wdcllts to icklltit Ltliaiouo argumiddot I11cnts )( 1) -94
Wilkinson V K amp 1)lt)1 i Ih influencc of collegc stmle-nt
logical Ull clecrlLi to h- i 11 ~ prO(SL~ ([Ier rcb iN UJ~Ji()
Vilkinsoll X K amp Sdmart l II I 9fCllhc oricllLltioll I gittLd
adolcsccnrs 11 tL (d 11[ model Reports hJ r6-l)-k
Young E (2001 hyJun(i rlh l)uildillg blocks ()tlir~ fJ COlriu j(gt--+H
A Guide to Recommended Practices
19
GALLAGHER20
Yurgelun-1()dd D A amp Kilgore X D (2006) harmiddotmiddotre8ted acridt in the prefrontal
cortex increases with age during adolescence A preliminary f1RI study Neuroscience Lmer406194-19()
Zhang L F (J 999) Furrher cross-cultural validation of rill theory of menul self-governshymenr journal 133 16)-1)1
Zhang L F amp atkins D (200 II Cognitivc dcvcloplllll1t llld stUdcnt approaches to
learning An investigation ofPerns theor~ vith Clullcse and US uniersitv students Higher EduCfltiol1 41239-2(1
SUSANr
We
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
13 DESIGNED TO FIT
found with middle school srudenrs (Schommer-Aikins Duell amp 11l[ter 2005) Studenrs at lower levels may have trouble correcring misconceptions and draw
only fact-based information from inquiry-oriented environments (Ryan ] 984) Epistemological Jtanee aJectJ ildvanced academic performance Students with
more advanced belief have an easier time building logical arguments (Weinstock
Kellman amp Tabak 2(04) they tend to choose thinking strategies that Slipport
deep rather than surface learning (Cano 2005 Zhang amp Watkins 2(01) Kitchshy
enet (1983) also suggested that students selectioll of meracognirive strategies can
be affected by their epis((mologicai beliefs Support for this idea comes from a study by Ruban and Reis (2006) who found that high-achieving students tended
to select cnhancemem oriented learning strategies while lower achieving srudents
selected survival oriented strategies
Illstruction can encourage )WIemem to higber epistemological elcTelChers
can affecr changes in students epistemological thinking through intentionally
structllred learning experiences (Kloss 1094 Kronholm 1993l Strategies recomshy
mended to dCc1op epistemological thinking include using ill-structured problems
and instructional straregics thar allow srudenrs to examine their assumptions anashy
lyze data that present different conHicting perspectiyes and then make decisions
(King amp Kitchener 20(4) Devoting some time to direct instruction about tbe
narure of the discipline helps develop higher levels of reasoning (Bdl 20(4) vhmltltch bet1 iecn instructiol t7 lid epistemoogiCtl Itllnee (pnspect i IJt) colltributes
to jruurrltiol[ (wd disillusiolllJlflll Cedric didnt respond well when Ms Marrin
started a f1Cr-based lecture Over time he will simply decide that school is trivial
or worse meaningless Had Ms 1artin staned imtead with a discllssion of the
violation of Native Americans sense of personhood Cedric wOllld have been
thrilled and Carl would hae been lost This kind of disparity creates barriers to
learning (Nelson 19()6 PelTY 1(70) --Jebel and Schommer-Aikins (2002) f()lnd
that a mismatch between insrruction and stance caused work avoidance among
some high school phYsics students Lovell and lunnefY (2004) ltJUnd that srudents
even found small-group work Illore Itisfing when they Vere grouped according
to sranct (perspecrhc)
Giftrd tlldCIIpound1 tmel to tlJead iii epistemgical dezclopllllllt Stll(iiLs of adoshylescents doculllent that cpistemological belicts mature in a pndioablc dcvelopshy
mental sequcnce (Cano 200) Zhang amp latk ins 2(01) In parallcl to formal
operational reasoning gifred rdoiesccl1t move through episremologicli stges in
the same sequence (Ihomas 2()08) but tend to be a stage or rwo ahead of orlIer
rhe same age (Arlin amp LCirr Il))X Goldberger 1981 Schollll11er I Dunnell
1997 ~n1Omas) 2008 Wilkinsoll I Iaxwcll 1991 iilkinsoll amp Schw~lrtz 19X-1
Lible 1 provides a general seme of the distribution of senior year studcm baSell on existing research
Adult experts tend to holt IlrlzlIIeal epi)tllIIologimlliClls -Ihc epistcl11ojogicri
framework also provides a UHl1lCtiOIl to anuther aspect of experrisc -CIO the
disciplines the behaviors and l([irlllk associared with mature episrel11ologv arc
A Guide to Recommended Practices
[
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
gt ~ ~--------------
GALLAGHER14
considered essential for advanced authentic work (Buehl amp Alexander 2005 Felder 1997 Henderson 1995 Kloss 1994 Muis 20(4)
Connections With G~fted Education Evidence that gifted students tend ro
be somewhat ahead of their age-mates in epistemological development follows
naturally from the data on formal operations reponed above However other
inreresting connections bring this theon into cohesion with existing knowledge
of giftltd students for example there is some indication that people who prlttCr
Intuition on the Jhers-Briggs Type Inventory tend [() have higher epistemologishy
cal stances (Zhang 199()) Cifted rudents overwhelmingly report this prdlrenCl
(Sak 2004) and the connecrion gives further evidencc that giftcd students will
respond best to open-ended inquiry-oriented learning environments Similarly
it explains gifted adolescents positive response to mentOr relationships Like
all adolescents gifted reenagers want to see similarities bcrween themselves and
others in mentors they find kindred spirits who think abour ideas from similar
frames of mind
Most exciting perhaps is the COil necrion between epistell1oosY md expertise
Not only do gifted students show earlv potential to achieve the expens high levels
of reasoning bur also epistell1ologicalll10deis provide a guide to he p explain how [() move all students closer to authentic higher order reasoning Callagher (l99X) suggested that models slIch as these would make effecdve frameworks for designing
high school curriculum providing an organic model for differentiation Based on
his study of adolescent epistelllological beliefs Cano (200raquo) concurred
it is necessary to take into account nor only students previous knowlshy
edge and learning strategies bur also their learning approaches and
epistemological beliefs Secondlv wc should work directly to try to
enhance [he depth of learning approaches and the complexity of episshy
temological belid~ as way of improving academic achievemenc (p 217)
Finally this framework reinforces the notion that the outcomes tt)r ignorshy
ing srudents beliefs are grave Srudents have trouble accepting the relevance of
instrtlLtion that is out of sync with their stag (Perr- ]970) a finding that is
consonant with the well-established knowledge that gifred adolescents reject munshy
dane repetitive curriculum hlrrher gifted students operating at higher levels than
other students find instrllction orienred towards the majorit uninspiring and
communicate their feelings through underachievement More sltriollsly perhaps
Nelson (1989) cautioned that excessive time spent in low-lenl curriculum actively
builds a wall of habit that blocks the path to higher level reasoning Even rapid
acceleration can havc this d~magillg eftect ifstudenrs are onlv accelerated into nev
low-level content It) prmidl a climl[e read for higher order thinking educators
must present COIltCIH that is accelerated vertically as well as horizomalh-
CI [
tCl ~I
1
lhe IS 110 i I
and fUc
hest n~II
15
bull - r
~ shy
~
~n( )1shy
()f ut I
l1UI1shy
[hm
inti
lpid
DLltiCNEl) TO m
Complete Coherence Evidence-Based Recommendations for
Differentiation in Secondary School
Each of the perspecrivcs considercc1 in this rationale is championed h differshy
ent researchers operating from different paradigms and using differenr research
techniques Even so their respectin findings arc remarkably similar
1 Gifted adolescents nced exposure [0 ~l larger quanrity of coment that
the find dnllenging Beginning at least in middle schooL abstract conshy
tenr should he a srandard part of their curriculum I he importlnle of developing a plenriful high-quality wcll of information i essLlHial as
it is a precursor to using higher order thinking ll1etJcognitivc thinking
and abstract thinking Cifted students will lot adequJtek develop their
thinking skills without this knowledge base 2 A quality knowledge bZlse is neCssary hilt notutticilmiddotllt ItH developing
thinking skilk Ciftecl studenrs 1lUt be presented with Ierning experishy
ences that require them to engage their critical thinking skills and metlshy
cognitive skills If they do not find their assignments challenging their
brains willilot engage their higher order functions T()gether content and
strategv med along ith metacognition predict academic perf()[mltlnce
making the simultalleous devdopmenr of these three paramount
3 Cifted students show earl~ promise t()r deydoping expertise Capitalizi ng
on that earlv promise requires instruction where stlldems Gl1 practice the
qualities of expcrtbe including open-ended imtruction inquiry-based
instruction problcm-oriented instrucrion field experiences and menrorshy
ships all cCl1[ercd 011 high-qualitv disciplinarv or imcrdisciplinary content
Cifted srudents arc most lihk to sec this instruction as relevant and draw
maximum value hom it
4 Expertisc requircs more thall contLflt and skill habits of mind ~llld
~llhaI1C1d epistemological re~lsoning also arc essentiaL If we aspirc for gifted students-~or for allY s(Udel1l~--to hecome creative productive leadshy
ers in their chosen field curriculutH ~lJld instruction should he selected to
develop these simultaneoush- and include exposure to the philosophies
and (thics of thc disciplines
The absence of a qualin- differerlliated secondary progrll11 flH gifted students
is not a neutral position it is 1 choice that will result in deficit skill dCeopmcnt
and student apathy At worr it ill result in the disillusionment some of the
best minds in the country
A Guide to Recommended Practices
i
GALLAGHER16
References
Arlin P K amp Levin L (1998) A deelopmenta perspc((ic on giftedness
HeetlrcIoltnlld I )4~~5i(1 Baxter Jvlagolda Jvl B (J 987) Comparing open-ended inteljcs lnd standardized mea- Hair
sun of inrelieefUal development ollilla Strfmt PCIJoiJle 28 443~44S -i
BdL E (2004) Promoring StUdUHS argumenr consrrncriOll and collahorativc debate in thc Hell science classfl)om rn ~ 1 C Linn E A Davis amp P Bell (Eds J Imimlt J1lrOltrrIOtS h~middot
seimC IIiCilioll (pp 11 i-145) lal11ah 1 Lawrence Erlballl11
rkrningcr V amp Yates C (J (95) Formal operational thought in rhe gifted A postshy H(ln~
Piagetian pnspecriC Hu(ti (nilli I) 220~224 HUN
Rirnn B L (l991 Formal operHional nlsolling Illodes Predictors of critical thinking
abilit ies alld grade assigned Iw reacher in sciencc and nlarhemltltics il[ student in
grades nine rhrough [tke Ollljli ill Sciei( 28 2()-2~4 InhclcL
Buehl 1 amp Alnlnder P (2001) lorivarion and pnr~HlllaJl(e ditferemes in srudelJ[
dOllllin-specific epiSrllllUI()~illt11 bel iet profiles ilIHlIll FdllClitiolfll NCilllrchOII1i
middoti2 (N-- - 2(
ClIlO I (200i) Lpistcl]ologicai bclid~ IJlld a[lproaches to Icllning Ih~ir through lh secol1dan chool wd their influcncc Oil lCademic pn~lrn1alKe Bllti_f lotmil
tdlildtiOllit -) 205- 221 Kanl
ClIl 1 amp Alexander I (I )()6) Xhere giftd children do 1Ild do nO[ cxcel on llleracogshy
n irin lasb Noel) NcriCiI 18 12lt 1( 1)
Cherne L 11 VinrCl J amp Chlrnc j1 l (200i) NucleH problem s()h-ln~ Kanl
elise stUlh of expert-I1Oicl differences hllliSlletoll fI(the iVdmtI of
Seillle w 1-- hi 11 T H (lascL R amp iarr 1 J (itk) (19HHl Ihc Itttn If
NJ Lawrence Erlbaulll King I
CsiksCIHIll ihali 1 1 Ib rJundt K amp Whakn S ( 1 )94) ]tIIIItc tieillgcn 11( mou of I 1 JifCCC-S Iiiirifllllln Bmrou ( PrlmiddotSS ~
[lidson I L amp I I tJ)Hj)lh roll ofimighr in ilwlIeuual ~ifredncs King l
(dial Child (jlltrtal ]8 is-hi dc Urnl 1 amp lLlll~jl 1 11()()iIlhlmiddot riariollshil hcmlln 1biliriLs and slt1rshy
regllbrld Ic~lrning l ilkncc ti) imcraLTiolb with leIck-mil sdt~lomcpt Ild gender
iglllbiit) lirlI ( 2() 1 ) S
Felder R (19~J 1 kCl our s1Udenrs Dac hrrlLl and Ruhcllo ChtlJiicd KItin
Fdll(iltOi31 10(- j() d Cllb~hcr J l-Llrrallilll C ( 0 (olcn1lt1ll ~1 R (J 9F) UlilIkllgc or boredom Ciftld Ii
tlldIHS ics on rhir ((Pi1 NUiCli 19 132~l(1 iI
Callagher S A (l)lt)H 11 he ((lld 10 ulrinl rhinking I he scheille lilt llleH1in~ht KIo I
ditttTcnriation ii Hill(IiII 8li iL)) 12-20 ic Calb~her S 1 (2()()()1 l rhmiddot to slience expcrtiscmiddot In F Dixon amp S Kronl](I
0100[1 ( l IitI)i u (lllllIO1 [PI 1()~middot+6(J) I1U) TX (n
Irufroc k Prns larson 1
CipsoJ] 1 brdulll 1 0 Ic1111ll L t 19S)1 Rcll(ollhil hC[Cll1 t(lrmal-opltTniullll dlOughr and ttllhclrud ditkulrie in geflLtiS problem IUIilidl ofRlsldJ(f ill --I J gt~
Slilll( ( S 1 1--S2 I Loell (
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
17 DESIGNED TO fiT
ul
IX
Gorodetsky 1 amp Klavir R (2003) What can we learn from how giftedaverage pupils
describe their processes of problem solving) Learning amp Instruction 13 305-326 Grabner R Neubauer A amp Srern E (2006) Superior performance and neural efficiencv
Ihe impact of intelligence and expertise Brain Research Bulletin 69 422-439 Haicr R J JUl1g R E Yeo R A Head K amp Alkire M r (200t) Srrllcrural brain
variHion and general inrelligence Netlroimage J L 425-435 Henderson S (J 995) Vh do I hae ro be here) The Advanced Placement srudelH in
firs(~vear composition Problems and isslles in cognitive development journal ondar) Gifted EduCtlri(Jl 7 )24-532
Hong L (19)9) Swdying the mind of rhe gifted ROfper Relieu 21 244-2)2 Hurst R amp Milkenr 11 (1996) Facilitaring successful prediccion problem gt(living in
biology through application ofskill theor jOllnJal ill Scimce ) 541-)52
Inhclder fl amp Piager j (19)8) the cililrflIor1I IlrO-fi((
Jew York Basic fI()oks
Jarvin L amp Subomik R (2006) Understanding elitc taient ill acadcmil domaim A
dcvclopmcl1(al ttajccwn from hasic ahilities O scholarlv producrivitvcmisfr In E A Dixon amp S 1 Moon (Eek) thc hillidbook (pp205-220) vhco TX Prufrock Press
Kancsky L (1)92) Gifred children and thc learning process Imights on both tlom rhe
rcsearch III E Miinks amp Xi Peters (Eds) J(tlmr r1( (pp 1))middot161) Asscn
Ihe 0lctherlands Van CorClUll
Kanevsky L amp KeighlcvL (2003) 1~) produce or nor ro produce understanding hOi dum and the honor in umkrlchkl111cnr RCIitll26 2()2R
Kauflll]n J C Gentile C r amp Bllf J (200)) Do gifted sflllknr writers and crec)(ive
writing experts raIL lTlcni in till same Child QlltlltCrl 4) 2()O-265 King P v1 amp Kitchener K S (1)94) jll(zr1II IllI
flild illtcllltfli ill flrocsCm fllld (lIn San
Francisco Josse~ Bass
King l 1 amp Kitchencr K S (2004) Iefieltivc judgllllm Ihcorv and research on thl
dtveioplllelH ()f pircmic assllmptions through adulrhood Fdilolfiolltll
YJ(I) )-lR
Kitchener K S (1 )HI) Cogllition Il1ctalugnirioll and episttmic cognition A rhrcltlevel
model of cognitivc pnllc fl1I11II11I )11 dOjJ 1IItl1 I 6 222~252 Klein J T (I ))3) Blurring CLIcking mel crossing Permcation and thc fracturing of
discipline In E lesscr-DlidO D R ShUlllV amp D J Shan (Eds) (Pl 1 Hi-21 I) Charlnwsdle Uniersin
of Virginia Press
Kloss R J (19)4) nudge is hest Helping srudems throllgh rhe Iern schellll of intll
Iccruat Jeel0pllhnr I] I i 1-1 lH
Kronholm M 1 (19J) l Ihe i mp)ct of dCIdnpmenral instruction on rcHen ill iudgmellL
RCIieU ofHigber ErlIldtillll I i 1))-middot2)) Larson R V amp Richmk 1 11 1 L)J 1 ugusr) Boredom in (hi middle scilll() I
ears Blaming schoolgt erus gtIamitlg mdenrs 1l11encdll jOIiJIiI OjliJI(I[JOII 9)
418-44) Lmell C X amp 0unnen j i 2()()i i Tesling the adulr dCelopme1( I()CI of [lahel
hvpothesis HOI1l0gillCOll hmiddot lln position mllaboldtile learning groups and grcldu
ate student sarisfanion tllrtr 11 IY) 1)0
A Guide to Recommended Practices
L GtgtLlA(HER18
Ludlow B L amp Voodrum D T (1)82) Problem-sohing and aerag~
Icarners on a multiple discrimination task (ild
Matthews D amp lkLwghlin T 1)94) EHects otleHIlr-cclHcln acthitics on
achievement and students preterences in [So hiih 5c11Ol lLtrSes HI(tPWdl
fllld AOo)li -8 28)-286 ivlcDonJkl J (I )Kl) Cogniric dcnlopmenr Jnd the rlUdU or geometric contcllr
Rlslrd ill f(ltbcJlldti f((cilwm 20 -11-)4
vlontlgue 1 (19() 1 J Cihnl and Icnning diabkd gifrcd smdllls lise of knowledge and
usc of mrriHIllHicli and prohlem sohing srrarcgic I I(uuioll oftII
11 Y))-+II
middotluis K (2004) ierson(rl cpisrcmologv and marhcmuics - critical rcic and smhesis
of research RcIlli lifdll(lIli()Ii Retii -1 31--3-- Neher H amp Scholllnllr-middotikim 1 (20021 Sclf-regubted ilIKC with hiohl
gitted students l11e rok of cogn it i l l110t i UiOll] L pist cillologicd md cm [ron l1](llshy
[11 (1liahle linif Stili lin 3( I i iC)_-I
Nelson C E (I )8)) Skcwered on th unicorns horn 111lt iluion or the rr(lckotf between content and LTitk1 thinking in the lcaching otsliLllcC [n L X row (Edi
(nth II iii hI j(ltIlaquo rpp 17_-) (lshingrotl DC ]11[onll
Scimee (ltrehers AsOl iou ion
Nelson c E (1 )9() Studellt dicrsir rCl]uircs ditknm appro(lLhcs to collqc tcaciling
Cln in math llld sckncc iIIlT(dl Fiehtllltl(ri S((illhl -10 1(1)-1)
Niaz L amp Robinson Xi (1 j)2) IW1l algllrithmic mode [(l Ol1ccprur1 gCs[1lt in
1Il1lkrstanding rill blhavior of gibe An cpiSlclllOiogic11 pcrspccric Rt(Igt ii)(fshy
IIII 0 ic(bliologiCd hhl(iltiOi J(J )5-(H
Ilttry V ( II (I JeD) hJlII ojilferlld tllirl erb(lt r(ICOPJltJ iii tilt ieiln J Idllltll NeW York Holt Rinehart amp iINon
Plucker J A amp kInrire J (1 l9()) lldel11il sllnilbilin ill high-pOIClHill middle school StlldllltS Cifra (hlld I() --1middot1
Rahinmviu 0 CIar R (llJH)) Cq rulturc Ilnd proces in high U)11Pl lent plrr()rmOlllcmiddot In I D Horcmill 0 1 OBrkn ([k) 111 1111r1Ii1fmte4
11 perpeelIlc (PI -)-)8) ahjn~[oil DC rmCIIlCn ycltologkJI
-soc ia[i 0 n
RohimoJl amp Clinkcnbeard l R (1 ))8) Clftcdncss An cxccprlonaiirv examined
AIIlliltl1 RIIicll j) 11- 151
Ruh1I1 L amp RcI S ((()() Pancrn ohdi~rcglliatiotl jl(men of strHcS
lISC 11llOllg I[)v-Khiing mel high-lchicing univnsin sludlHs ROi lt11leu 8 14K-I
Rv(m 1 (I )k+) loniwring [Xl (ol1lprci1lnsion Inciiidud dirkrcllns in
ul gttandards JOIIiIId
SaL U (2004) A npls ()fhiftd adobccnrsoilld
Schummll 1 (I ))l 11 lOllccprualilllriol1 O(CpiSlcllloiogical hdicl~ and thcir
role 011 kamint In R (lrtlCr ( i A Alexander (Lds) dOllIiX( lid ilitJlC
(iOIl Itit tCXI 2i--fOI liillbJc 1 LlTClllC Erlblllll1
Scitorn1l1er 1 amp DUIlIlLil l 1Jrl Epistcmologicti bdd~ or littcd high chuol
studcllls RalIi 19 1-middot1 )(
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
SChOlllll1(
enul
J7I Shieci
d ir )l)-
Shore II
chilei JlIT
Shore H
dllf
i( ) Sowell
1()
i
Span I
Stcinc I
a rmiddot fl]
SrlillC1 i
In Srcrnh~l
L f Slnnh_
(
Suhotl1~
fhollLh
ch
11lt 111 __
~ ~ tcshy
ri
choo
DESICNED FiT
Schommer-AikinsL Duell 0 K amp Hurter R (2005) Epistemological mathshy
emarical probkm-solving beliefs and academic of middle school students
Ihe 105289-304 Shieer S amp ]1aker C J 199-) Enrichment and acceleration An meniew 1I1d new
directions In ~ Colangelo amp C Davis Haildboo edllcation 99-110) Boston Allm amp Bacon
Shore B M (2000) ktacognitiol1 and Hexibilitmiddot differences in how gifted
children think In R C Friedman amp B 1 Shore (Elk) rllllts ulljf)dillg CogshylIitioli and dlleopllllt 16--1Sn vrashil1gton DC American PsChological
Association
Shore B 1 amp Irving J (200j) Inquirv as a Il(dagogicallink hetween expnie lnc
giftedness111e lbili( lI1d inquin resc1ch group at 1cCili Lnhmiddotcrir
fwd tofld IlIteliirUllilidl O( 1)5-40
Shore B fL amp Lazar 1 (1996) differences in time alltlcatiol1 Irhlc-m
-8 11411-S49
Sowell L R 1cters()ll B S lhol11pon P 1 e1cuIllLmiddot S [ Il~nklt nill L amp lc)gl A V (2003l bpping cortical Cross rhe human lit~ pan MUIII
iVmoicillIr( () 309-51 i
Span )1 amp Oertool11-COrSIll iL R (19H6) Informatioll ng hmiddot intellectual
pupils sullillg Illarhcmuical prohlems Frill(tlliolldl Stil 1 Alarfeillrltio -
273-291 SteineL H H amp Carr 1 12(05) C
more preci undersundinf of Hrclgr RIIiCli 15 21)-21
denmiddotlopl11lnt in children Toward
di fferenccs ill i mel Iigencl Ldi(tltlOlIr
Stcimmiddotr H H amp Clrr 1 (200() 1 r(ldolIIl11t oproJIeil -ollilI Iii gijicrl lllirl Ilmgl~iiil) (fidllll lc(rr(J liml d(fo(illiilt to edliCtiolliI
I-bllppauge lY Ioa Science
Srnnbcrg R J (Ed) (191-12) flIIrll)(o ahliililll illllllgolec ~e York Cambridge
Unlnsir Press
StLrnberg RI (2()()~ L hroJd ie or il1telligencefllc thl(l~ of sllcccssful
COllilltilig lotrildmiddot Jritti(1 illlt R(tllc 55 15)-1 i-l
Sllbotnik R F (2()(Ul doicC1[ pathway to lmll1LIllC ill seicnlL Lcsom irom the
music COIlSLratoIY III P CLTmch- amp L ledcrlllltln (hisl SUOi([ (rII(lItioll [tllII
rnmitllloi( i1Hd pllblli 2)i-502) Burke lOS Pre
lhonl1sI- (200S) RCiing and
ethnicity Il()n~ gifted high SdlOUI sllIdcJl(
Wluing 1 (1989) Logical IllCe-sln to mlkc line graphs j(llnldl itl middotcima J( 3-1-3 -q
Veins[Ock 1 )culllan Y amp iaiuk 1 2()) I) liing thc point or [hL nomh
of wdcllts to icklltit Ltliaiouo argumiddot I11cnts )( 1) -94
Wilkinson V K amp 1)lt)1 i Ih influencc of collegc stmle-nt
logical Ull clecrlLi to h- i 11 ~ prO(SL~ ([Ier rcb iN UJ~Ji()
Vilkinsoll X K amp Sdmart l II I 9fCllhc oricllLltioll I gittLd
adolcsccnrs 11 tL (d 11[ model Reports hJ r6-l)-k
Young E (2001 hyJun(i rlh l)uildillg blocks ()tlir~ fJ COlriu j(gt--+H
A Guide to Recommended Practices
19
GALLAGHER20
Yurgelun-1()dd D A amp Kilgore X D (2006) harmiddotmiddotre8ted acridt in the prefrontal
cortex increases with age during adolescence A preliminary f1RI study Neuroscience Lmer406194-19()
Zhang L F (J 999) Furrher cross-cultural validation of rill theory of menul self-governshymenr journal 133 16)-1)1
Zhang L F amp atkins D (200 II Cognitivc dcvcloplllll1t llld stUdcnt approaches to
learning An investigation ofPerns theor~ vith Clullcse and US uniersitv students Higher EduCfltiol1 41239-2(1
SUSANr
We
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
[
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
gt ~ ~--------------
GALLAGHER14
considered essential for advanced authentic work (Buehl amp Alexander 2005 Felder 1997 Henderson 1995 Kloss 1994 Muis 20(4)
Connections With G~fted Education Evidence that gifted students tend ro
be somewhat ahead of their age-mates in epistemological development follows
naturally from the data on formal operations reponed above However other
inreresting connections bring this theon into cohesion with existing knowledge
of giftltd students for example there is some indication that people who prlttCr
Intuition on the Jhers-Briggs Type Inventory tend [() have higher epistemologishy
cal stances (Zhang 199()) Cifted rudents overwhelmingly report this prdlrenCl
(Sak 2004) and the connecrion gives further evidencc that giftcd students will
respond best to open-ended inquiry-oriented learning environments Similarly
it explains gifted adolescents positive response to mentOr relationships Like
all adolescents gifted reenagers want to see similarities bcrween themselves and
others in mentors they find kindred spirits who think abour ideas from similar
frames of mind
Most exciting perhaps is the COil necrion between epistell1oosY md expertise
Not only do gifted students show earlv potential to achieve the expens high levels
of reasoning bur also epistell1ologicalll10deis provide a guide to he p explain how [() move all students closer to authentic higher order reasoning Callagher (l99X) suggested that models slIch as these would make effecdve frameworks for designing
high school curriculum providing an organic model for differentiation Based on
his study of adolescent epistelllological beliefs Cano (200raquo) concurred
it is necessary to take into account nor only students previous knowlshy
edge and learning strategies bur also their learning approaches and
epistemological beliefs Secondlv wc should work directly to try to
enhance [he depth of learning approaches and the complexity of episshy
temological belid~ as way of improving academic achievemenc (p 217)
Finally this framework reinforces the notion that the outcomes tt)r ignorshy
ing srudents beliefs are grave Srudents have trouble accepting the relevance of
instrtlLtion that is out of sync with their stag (Perr- ]970) a finding that is
consonant with the well-established knowledge that gifred adolescents reject munshy
dane repetitive curriculum hlrrher gifted students operating at higher levels than
other students find instrllction orienred towards the majorit uninspiring and
communicate their feelings through underachievement More sltriollsly perhaps
Nelson (1989) cautioned that excessive time spent in low-lenl curriculum actively
builds a wall of habit that blocks the path to higher level reasoning Even rapid
acceleration can havc this d~magillg eftect ifstudenrs are onlv accelerated into nev
low-level content It) prmidl a climl[e read for higher order thinking educators
must present COIltCIH that is accelerated vertically as well as horizomalh-
CI [
tCl ~I
1
lhe IS 110 i I
and fUc
hest n~II
15
bull - r
~ shy
~
~n( )1shy
()f ut I
l1UI1shy
[hm
inti
lpid
DLltiCNEl) TO m
Complete Coherence Evidence-Based Recommendations for
Differentiation in Secondary School
Each of the perspecrivcs considercc1 in this rationale is championed h differshy
ent researchers operating from different paradigms and using differenr research
techniques Even so their respectin findings arc remarkably similar
1 Gifted adolescents nced exposure [0 ~l larger quanrity of coment that
the find dnllenging Beginning at least in middle schooL abstract conshy
tenr should he a srandard part of their curriculum I he importlnle of developing a plenriful high-quality wcll of information i essLlHial as
it is a precursor to using higher order thinking ll1etJcognitivc thinking
and abstract thinking Cifted students will lot adequJtek develop their
thinking skills without this knowledge base 2 A quality knowledge bZlse is neCssary hilt notutticilmiddotllt ItH developing
thinking skilk Ciftecl studenrs 1lUt be presented with Ierning experishy
ences that require them to engage their critical thinking skills and metlshy
cognitive skills If they do not find their assignments challenging their
brains willilot engage their higher order functions T()gether content and
strategv med along ith metacognition predict academic perf()[mltlnce
making the simultalleous devdopmenr of these three paramount
3 Cifted students show earl~ promise t()r deydoping expertise Capitalizi ng
on that earlv promise requires instruction where stlldems Gl1 practice the
qualities of expcrtbe including open-ended imtruction inquiry-based
instruction problcm-oriented instrucrion field experiences and menrorshy
ships all cCl1[ercd 011 high-qualitv disciplinarv or imcrdisciplinary content
Cifted srudents arc most lihk to sec this instruction as relevant and draw
maximum value hom it
4 Expertisc requircs more thall contLflt and skill habits of mind ~llld
~llhaI1C1d epistemological re~lsoning also arc essentiaL If we aspirc for gifted students-~or for allY s(Udel1l~--to hecome creative productive leadshy
ers in their chosen field curriculutH ~lJld instruction should he selected to
develop these simultaneoush- and include exposure to the philosophies
and (thics of thc disciplines
The absence of a qualin- differerlliated secondary progrll11 flH gifted students
is not a neutral position it is 1 choice that will result in deficit skill dCeopmcnt
and student apathy At worr it ill result in the disillusionment some of the
best minds in the country
A Guide to Recommended Practices
i
GALLAGHER16
References
Arlin P K amp Levin L (1998) A deelopmenta perspc((ic on giftedness
HeetlrcIoltnlld I )4~~5i(1 Baxter Jvlagolda Jvl B (J 987) Comparing open-ended inteljcs lnd standardized mea- Hair
sun of inrelieefUal development ollilla Strfmt PCIJoiJle 28 443~44S -i
BdL E (2004) Promoring StUdUHS argumenr consrrncriOll and collahorativc debate in thc Hell science classfl)om rn ~ 1 C Linn E A Davis amp P Bell (Eds J Imimlt J1lrOltrrIOtS h~middot
seimC IIiCilioll (pp 11 i-145) lal11ah 1 Lawrence Erlballl11
rkrningcr V amp Yates C (J (95) Formal operational thought in rhe gifted A postshy H(ln~
Piagetian pnspecriC Hu(ti (nilli I) 220~224 HUN
Rirnn B L (l991 Formal operHional nlsolling Illodes Predictors of critical thinking
abilit ies alld grade assigned Iw reacher in sciencc and nlarhemltltics il[ student in
grades nine rhrough [tke Ollljli ill Sciei( 28 2()-2~4 InhclcL
Buehl 1 amp Alnlnder P (2001) lorivarion and pnr~HlllaJl(e ditferemes in srudelJ[
dOllllin-specific epiSrllllUI()~illt11 bel iet profiles ilIHlIll FdllClitiolfll NCilllrchOII1i
middoti2 (N-- - 2(
ClIlO I (200i) Lpistcl]ologicai bclid~ IJlld a[lproaches to Icllning Ih~ir through lh secol1dan chool wd their influcncc Oil lCademic pn~lrn1alKe Bllti_f lotmil
tdlildtiOllit -) 205- 221 Kanl
ClIl 1 amp Alexander I (I )()6) Xhere giftd children do 1Ild do nO[ cxcel on llleracogshy
n irin lasb Noel) NcriCiI 18 12lt 1( 1)
Cherne L 11 VinrCl J amp Chlrnc j1 l (200i) NucleH problem s()h-ln~ Kanl
elise stUlh of expert-I1Oicl differences hllliSlletoll fI(the iVdmtI of
Seillle w 1-- hi 11 T H (lascL R amp iarr 1 J (itk) (19HHl Ihc Itttn If
NJ Lawrence Erlbaulll King I
CsiksCIHIll ihali 1 1 Ib rJundt K amp Whakn S ( 1 )94) ]tIIIItc tieillgcn 11( mou of I 1 JifCCC-S Iiiirifllllln Bmrou ( PrlmiddotSS ~
[lidson I L amp I I tJ)Hj)lh roll ofimighr in ilwlIeuual ~ifredncs King l
(dial Child (jlltrtal ]8 is-hi dc Urnl 1 amp lLlll~jl 1 11()()iIlhlmiddot riariollshil hcmlln 1biliriLs and slt1rshy
regllbrld Ic~lrning l ilkncc ti) imcraLTiolb with leIck-mil sdt~lomcpt Ild gender
iglllbiit) lirlI ( 2() 1 ) S
Felder R (19~J 1 kCl our s1Udenrs Dac hrrlLl and Ruhcllo ChtlJiicd KItin
Fdll(iltOi31 10(- j() d Cllb~hcr J l-Llrrallilll C ( 0 (olcn1lt1ll ~1 R (J 9F) UlilIkllgc or boredom Ciftld Ii
tlldIHS ics on rhir ((Pi1 NUiCli 19 132~l(1 iI
Callagher S A (l)lt)H 11 he ((lld 10 ulrinl rhinking I he scheille lilt llleH1in~ht KIo I
ditttTcnriation ii Hill(IiII 8li iL)) 12-20 ic Calb~her S 1 (2()()()1 l rhmiddot to slience expcrtiscmiddot In F Dixon amp S Kronl](I
0100[1 ( l IitI)i u (lllllIO1 [PI 1()~middot+6(J) I1U) TX (n
Irufroc k Prns larson 1
CipsoJ] 1 brdulll 1 0 Ic1111ll L t 19S)1 Rcll(ollhil hC[Cll1 t(lrmal-opltTniullll dlOughr and ttllhclrud ditkulrie in geflLtiS problem IUIilidl ofRlsldJ(f ill --I J gt~
Slilll( ( S 1 1--S2 I Loell (
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
17 DESIGNED TO fiT
ul
IX
Gorodetsky 1 amp Klavir R (2003) What can we learn from how giftedaverage pupils
describe their processes of problem solving) Learning amp Instruction 13 305-326 Grabner R Neubauer A amp Srern E (2006) Superior performance and neural efficiencv
Ihe impact of intelligence and expertise Brain Research Bulletin 69 422-439 Haicr R J JUl1g R E Yeo R A Head K amp Alkire M r (200t) Srrllcrural brain
variHion and general inrelligence Netlroimage J L 425-435 Henderson S (J 995) Vh do I hae ro be here) The Advanced Placement srudelH in
firs(~vear composition Problems and isslles in cognitive development journal ondar) Gifted EduCtlri(Jl 7 )24-532
Hong L (19)9) Swdying the mind of rhe gifted ROfper Relieu 21 244-2)2 Hurst R amp Milkenr 11 (1996) Facilitaring successful prediccion problem gt(living in
biology through application ofskill theor jOllnJal ill Scimce ) 541-)52
Inhclder fl amp Piager j (19)8) the cililrflIor1I IlrO-fi((
Jew York Basic fI()oks
Jarvin L amp Subomik R (2006) Understanding elitc taient ill acadcmil domaim A
dcvclopmcl1(al ttajccwn from hasic ahilities O scholarlv producrivitvcmisfr In E A Dixon amp S 1 Moon (Eek) thc hillidbook (pp205-220) vhco TX Prufrock Press
Kancsky L (1)92) Gifred children and thc learning process Imights on both tlom rhe
rcsearch III E Miinks amp Xi Peters (Eds) J(tlmr r1( (pp 1))middot161) Asscn
Ihe 0lctherlands Van CorClUll
Kanevsky L amp KeighlcvL (2003) 1~) produce or nor ro produce understanding hOi dum and the honor in umkrlchkl111cnr RCIitll26 2()2R
Kauflll]n J C Gentile C r amp Bllf J (200)) Do gifted sflllknr writers and crec)(ive
writing experts raIL lTlcni in till same Child QlltlltCrl 4) 2()O-265 King P v1 amp Kitchener K S (1)94) jll(zr1II IllI
flild illtcllltfli ill flrocsCm fllld (lIn San
Francisco Josse~ Bass
King l 1 amp Kitchencr K S (2004) Iefieltivc judgllllm Ihcorv and research on thl
dtveioplllelH ()f pircmic assllmptions through adulrhood Fdilolfiolltll
YJ(I) )-lR
Kitchener K S (1 )HI) Cogllition Il1ctalugnirioll and episttmic cognition A rhrcltlevel
model of cognitivc pnllc fl1I11II11I )11 dOjJ 1IItl1 I 6 222~252 Klein J T (I ))3) Blurring CLIcking mel crossing Permcation and thc fracturing of
discipline In E lesscr-DlidO D R ShUlllV amp D J Shan (Eds) (Pl 1 Hi-21 I) Charlnwsdle Uniersin
of Virginia Press
Kloss R J (19)4) nudge is hest Helping srudems throllgh rhe Iern schellll of intll
Iccruat Jeel0pllhnr I] I i 1-1 lH
Kronholm M 1 (19J) l Ihe i mp)ct of dCIdnpmenral instruction on rcHen ill iudgmellL
RCIieU ofHigber ErlIldtillll I i 1))-middot2)) Larson R V amp Richmk 1 11 1 L)J 1 ugusr) Boredom in (hi middle scilll() I
ears Blaming schoolgt erus gtIamitlg mdenrs 1l11encdll jOIiJIiI OjliJI(I[JOII 9)
418-44) Lmell C X amp 0unnen j i 2()()i i Tesling the adulr dCelopme1( I()CI of [lahel
hvpothesis HOI1l0gillCOll hmiddot lln position mllaboldtile learning groups and grcldu
ate student sarisfanion tllrtr 11 IY) 1)0
A Guide to Recommended Practices
L GtgtLlA(HER18
Ludlow B L amp Voodrum D T (1)82) Problem-sohing and aerag~
Icarners on a multiple discrimination task (ild
Matthews D amp lkLwghlin T 1)94) EHects otleHIlr-cclHcln acthitics on
achievement and students preterences in [So hiih 5c11Ol lLtrSes HI(tPWdl
fllld AOo)li -8 28)-286 ivlcDonJkl J (I )Kl) Cogniric dcnlopmenr Jnd the rlUdU or geometric contcllr
Rlslrd ill f(ltbcJlldti f((cilwm 20 -11-)4
vlontlgue 1 (19() 1 J Cihnl and Icnning diabkd gifrcd smdllls lise of knowledge and
usc of mrriHIllHicli and prohlem sohing srrarcgic I I(uuioll oftII
11 Y))-+II
middotluis K (2004) ierson(rl cpisrcmologv and marhcmuics - critical rcic and smhesis
of research RcIlli lifdll(lIli()Ii Retii -1 31--3-- Neher H amp Scholllnllr-middotikim 1 (20021 Sclf-regubted ilIKC with hiohl
gitted students l11e rok of cogn it i l l110t i UiOll] L pist cillologicd md cm [ron l1](llshy
[11 (1liahle linif Stili lin 3( I i iC)_-I
Nelson C E (I )8)) Skcwered on th unicorns horn 111lt iluion or the rr(lckotf between content and LTitk1 thinking in the lcaching otsliLllcC [n L X row (Edi
(nth II iii hI j(ltIlaquo rpp 17_-) (lshingrotl DC ]11[onll
Scimee (ltrehers AsOl iou ion
Nelson c E (1 )9() Studellt dicrsir rCl]uircs ditknm appro(lLhcs to collqc tcaciling
Cln in math llld sckncc iIIlT(dl Fiehtllltl(ri S((illhl -10 1(1)-1)
Niaz L amp Robinson Xi (1 j)2) IW1l algllrithmic mode [(l Ol1ccprur1 gCs[1lt in
1Il1lkrstanding rill blhavior of gibe An cpiSlclllOiogic11 pcrspccric Rt(Igt ii)(fshy
IIII 0 ic(bliologiCd hhl(iltiOi J(J )5-(H
Ilttry V ( II (I JeD) hJlII ojilferlld tllirl erb(lt r(ICOPJltJ iii tilt ieiln J Idllltll NeW York Holt Rinehart amp iINon
Plucker J A amp kInrire J (1 l9()) lldel11il sllnilbilin ill high-pOIClHill middle school StlldllltS Cifra (hlld I() --1middot1
Rahinmviu 0 CIar R (llJH)) Cq rulturc Ilnd proces in high U)11Pl lent plrr()rmOlllcmiddot In I D Horcmill 0 1 OBrkn ([k) 111 1111r1Ii1fmte4
11 perpeelIlc (PI -)-)8) ahjn~[oil DC rmCIIlCn ycltologkJI
-soc ia[i 0 n
RohimoJl amp Clinkcnbeard l R (1 ))8) Clftcdncss An cxccprlonaiirv examined
AIIlliltl1 RIIicll j) 11- 151
Ruh1I1 L amp RcI S ((()() Pancrn ohdi~rcglliatiotl jl(men of strHcS
lISC 11llOllg I[)v-Khiing mel high-lchicing univnsin sludlHs ROi lt11leu 8 14K-I
Rv(m 1 (I )k+) loniwring [Xl (ol1lprci1lnsion Inciiidud dirkrcllns in
ul gttandards JOIIiIId
SaL U (2004) A npls ()fhiftd adobccnrsoilld
Schummll 1 (I ))l 11 lOllccprualilllriol1 O(CpiSlcllloiogical hdicl~ and thcir
role 011 kamint In R (lrtlCr ( i A Alexander (Lds) dOllIiX( lid ilitJlC
(iOIl Itit tCXI 2i--fOI liillbJc 1 LlTClllC Erlblllll1
Scitorn1l1er 1 amp DUIlIlLil l 1Jrl Epistcmologicti bdd~ or littcd high chuol
studcllls RalIi 19 1-middot1 )(
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
SChOlllll1(
enul
J7I Shieci
d ir )l)-
Shore II
chilei JlIT
Shore H
dllf
i( ) Sowell
1()
i
Span I
Stcinc I
a rmiddot fl]
SrlillC1 i
In Srcrnh~l
L f Slnnh_
(
Suhotl1~
fhollLh
ch
11lt 111 __
~ ~ tcshy
ri
choo
DESICNED FiT
Schommer-AikinsL Duell 0 K amp Hurter R (2005) Epistemological mathshy
emarical probkm-solving beliefs and academic of middle school students
Ihe 105289-304 Shieer S amp ]1aker C J 199-) Enrichment and acceleration An meniew 1I1d new
directions In ~ Colangelo amp C Davis Haildboo edllcation 99-110) Boston Allm amp Bacon
Shore B M (2000) ktacognitiol1 and Hexibilitmiddot differences in how gifted
children think In R C Friedman amp B 1 Shore (Elk) rllllts ulljf)dillg CogshylIitioli and dlleopllllt 16--1Sn vrashil1gton DC American PsChological
Association
Shore B 1 amp Irving J (200j) Inquirv as a Il(dagogicallink hetween expnie lnc
giftedness111e lbili( lI1d inquin resc1ch group at 1cCili Lnhmiddotcrir
fwd tofld IlIteliirUllilidl O( 1)5-40
Shore B fL amp Lazar 1 (1996) differences in time alltlcatiol1 Irhlc-m
-8 11411-S49
Sowell L R 1cters()ll B S lhol11pon P 1 e1cuIllLmiddot S [ Il~nklt nill L amp lc)gl A V (2003l bpping cortical Cross rhe human lit~ pan MUIII
iVmoicillIr( () 309-51 i
Span )1 amp Oertool11-COrSIll iL R (19H6) Informatioll ng hmiddot intellectual
pupils sullillg Illarhcmuical prohlems Frill(tlliolldl Stil 1 Alarfeillrltio -
273-291 SteineL H H amp Carr 1 12(05) C
more preci undersundinf of Hrclgr RIIiCli 15 21)-21
denmiddotlopl11lnt in children Toward
di fferenccs ill i mel Iigencl Ldi(tltlOlIr
Stcimmiddotr H H amp Clrr 1 (200() 1 r(ldolIIl11t oproJIeil -ollilI Iii gijicrl lllirl Ilmgl~iiil) (fidllll lc(rr(J liml d(fo(illiilt to edliCtiolliI
I-bllppauge lY Ioa Science
Srnnbcrg R J (Ed) (191-12) flIIrll)(o ahliililll illllllgolec ~e York Cambridge
Unlnsir Press
StLrnberg RI (2()()~ L hroJd ie or il1telligencefllc thl(l~ of sllcccssful
COllilltilig lotrildmiddot Jritti(1 illlt R(tllc 55 15)-1 i-l
Sllbotnik R F (2()(Ul doicC1[ pathway to lmll1LIllC ill seicnlL Lcsom irom the
music COIlSLratoIY III P CLTmch- amp L ledcrlllltln (hisl SUOi([ (rII(lItioll [tllII
rnmitllloi( i1Hd pllblli 2)i-502) Burke lOS Pre
lhonl1sI- (200S) RCiing and
ethnicity Il()n~ gifted high SdlOUI sllIdcJl(
Wluing 1 (1989) Logical IllCe-sln to mlkc line graphs j(llnldl itl middotcima J( 3-1-3 -q
Veins[Ock 1 )culllan Y amp iaiuk 1 2()) I) liing thc point or [hL nomh
of wdcllts to icklltit Ltliaiouo argumiddot I11cnts )( 1) -94
Wilkinson V K amp 1)lt)1 i Ih influencc of collegc stmle-nt
logical Ull clecrlLi to h- i 11 ~ prO(SL~ ([Ier rcb iN UJ~Ji()
Vilkinsoll X K amp Sdmart l II I 9fCllhc oricllLltioll I gittLd
adolcsccnrs 11 tL (d 11[ model Reports hJ r6-l)-k
Young E (2001 hyJun(i rlh l)uildillg blocks ()tlir~ fJ COlriu j(gt--+H
A Guide to Recommended Practices
19
GALLAGHER20
Yurgelun-1()dd D A amp Kilgore X D (2006) harmiddotmiddotre8ted acridt in the prefrontal
cortex increases with age during adolescence A preliminary f1RI study Neuroscience Lmer406194-19()
Zhang L F (J 999) Furrher cross-cultural validation of rill theory of menul self-governshymenr journal 133 16)-1)1
Zhang L F amp atkins D (200 II Cognitivc dcvcloplllll1t llld stUdcnt approaches to
learning An investigation ofPerns theor~ vith Clullcse and US uniersitv students Higher EduCfltiol1 41239-2(1
SUSANr
We
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
15
bull - r
~ shy
~
~n( )1shy
()f ut I
l1UI1shy
[hm
inti
lpid
DLltiCNEl) TO m
Complete Coherence Evidence-Based Recommendations for
Differentiation in Secondary School
Each of the perspecrivcs considercc1 in this rationale is championed h differshy
ent researchers operating from different paradigms and using differenr research
techniques Even so their respectin findings arc remarkably similar
1 Gifted adolescents nced exposure [0 ~l larger quanrity of coment that
the find dnllenging Beginning at least in middle schooL abstract conshy
tenr should he a srandard part of their curriculum I he importlnle of developing a plenriful high-quality wcll of information i essLlHial as
it is a precursor to using higher order thinking ll1etJcognitivc thinking
and abstract thinking Cifted students will lot adequJtek develop their
thinking skills without this knowledge base 2 A quality knowledge bZlse is neCssary hilt notutticilmiddotllt ItH developing
thinking skilk Ciftecl studenrs 1lUt be presented with Ierning experishy
ences that require them to engage their critical thinking skills and metlshy
cognitive skills If they do not find their assignments challenging their
brains willilot engage their higher order functions T()gether content and
strategv med along ith metacognition predict academic perf()[mltlnce
making the simultalleous devdopmenr of these three paramount
3 Cifted students show earl~ promise t()r deydoping expertise Capitalizi ng
on that earlv promise requires instruction where stlldems Gl1 practice the
qualities of expcrtbe including open-ended imtruction inquiry-based
instruction problcm-oriented instrucrion field experiences and menrorshy
ships all cCl1[ercd 011 high-qualitv disciplinarv or imcrdisciplinary content
Cifted srudents arc most lihk to sec this instruction as relevant and draw
maximum value hom it
4 Expertisc requircs more thall contLflt and skill habits of mind ~llld
~llhaI1C1d epistemological re~lsoning also arc essentiaL If we aspirc for gifted students-~or for allY s(Udel1l~--to hecome creative productive leadshy
ers in their chosen field curriculutH ~lJld instruction should he selected to
develop these simultaneoush- and include exposure to the philosophies
and (thics of thc disciplines
The absence of a qualin- differerlliated secondary progrll11 flH gifted students
is not a neutral position it is 1 choice that will result in deficit skill dCeopmcnt
and student apathy At worr it ill result in the disillusionment some of the
best minds in the country
A Guide to Recommended Practices
i
GALLAGHER16
References
Arlin P K amp Levin L (1998) A deelopmenta perspc((ic on giftedness
HeetlrcIoltnlld I )4~~5i(1 Baxter Jvlagolda Jvl B (J 987) Comparing open-ended inteljcs lnd standardized mea- Hair
sun of inrelieefUal development ollilla Strfmt PCIJoiJle 28 443~44S -i
BdL E (2004) Promoring StUdUHS argumenr consrrncriOll and collahorativc debate in thc Hell science classfl)om rn ~ 1 C Linn E A Davis amp P Bell (Eds J Imimlt J1lrOltrrIOtS h~middot
seimC IIiCilioll (pp 11 i-145) lal11ah 1 Lawrence Erlballl11
rkrningcr V amp Yates C (J (95) Formal operational thought in rhe gifted A postshy H(ln~
Piagetian pnspecriC Hu(ti (nilli I) 220~224 HUN
Rirnn B L (l991 Formal operHional nlsolling Illodes Predictors of critical thinking
abilit ies alld grade assigned Iw reacher in sciencc and nlarhemltltics il[ student in
grades nine rhrough [tke Ollljli ill Sciei( 28 2()-2~4 InhclcL
Buehl 1 amp Alnlnder P (2001) lorivarion and pnr~HlllaJl(e ditferemes in srudelJ[
dOllllin-specific epiSrllllUI()~illt11 bel iet profiles ilIHlIll FdllClitiolfll NCilllrchOII1i
middoti2 (N-- - 2(
ClIlO I (200i) Lpistcl]ologicai bclid~ IJlld a[lproaches to Icllning Ih~ir through lh secol1dan chool wd their influcncc Oil lCademic pn~lrn1alKe Bllti_f lotmil
tdlildtiOllit -) 205- 221 Kanl
ClIl 1 amp Alexander I (I )()6) Xhere giftd children do 1Ild do nO[ cxcel on llleracogshy
n irin lasb Noel) NcriCiI 18 12lt 1( 1)
Cherne L 11 VinrCl J amp Chlrnc j1 l (200i) NucleH problem s()h-ln~ Kanl
elise stUlh of expert-I1Oicl differences hllliSlletoll fI(the iVdmtI of
Seillle w 1-- hi 11 T H (lascL R amp iarr 1 J (itk) (19HHl Ihc Itttn If
NJ Lawrence Erlbaulll King I
CsiksCIHIll ihali 1 1 Ib rJundt K amp Whakn S ( 1 )94) ]tIIIItc tieillgcn 11( mou of I 1 JifCCC-S Iiiirifllllln Bmrou ( PrlmiddotSS ~
[lidson I L amp I I tJ)Hj)lh roll ofimighr in ilwlIeuual ~ifredncs King l
(dial Child (jlltrtal ]8 is-hi dc Urnl 1 amp lLlll~jl 1 11()()iIlhlmiddot riariollshil hcmlln 1biliriLs and slt1rshy
regllbrld Ic~lrning l ilkncc ti) imcraLTiolb with leIck-mil sdt~lomcpt Ild gender
iglllbiit) lirlI ( 2() 1 ) S
Felder R (19~J 1 kCl our s1Udenrs Dac hrrlLl and Ruhcllo ChtlJiicd KItin
Fdll(iltOi31 10(- j() d Cllb~hcr J l-Llrrallilll C ( 0 (olcn1lt1ll ~1 R (J 9F) UlilIkllgc or boredom Ciftld Ii
tlldIHS ics on rhir ((Pi1 NUiCli 19 132~l(1 iI
Callagher S A (l)lt)H 11 he ((lld 10 ulrinl rhinking I he scheille lilt llleH1in~ht KIo I
ditttTcnriation ii Hill(IiII 8li iL)) 12-20 ic Calb~her S 1 (2()()()1 l rhmiddot to slience expcrtiscmiddot In F Dixon amp S Kronl](I
0100[1 ( l IitI)i u (lllllIO1 [PI 1()~middot+6(J) I1U) TX (n
Irufroc k Prns larson 1
CipsoJ] 1 brdulll 1 0 Ic1111ll L t 19S)1 Rcll(ollhil hC[Cll1 t(lrmal-opltTniullll dlOughr and ttllhclrud ditkulrie in geflLtiS problem IUIilidl ofRlsldJ(f ill --I J gt~
Slilll( ( S 1 1--S2 I Loell (
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
17 DESIGNED TO fiT
ul
IX
Gorodetsky 1 amp Klavir R (2003) What can we learn from how giftedaverage pupils
describe their processes of problem solving) Learning amp Instruction 13 305-326 Grabner R Neubauer A amp Srern E (2006) Superior performance and neural efficiencv
Ihe impact of intelligence and expertise Brain Research Bulletin 69 422-439 Haicr R J JUl1g R E Yeo R A Head K amp Alkire M r (200t) Srrllcrural brain
variHion and general inrelligence Netlroimage J L 425-435 Henderson S (J 995) Vh do I hae ro be here) The Advanced Placement srudelH in
firs(~vear composition Problems and isslles in cognitive development journal ondar) Gifted EduCtlri(Jl 7 )24-532
Hong L (19)9) Swdying the mind of rhe gifted ROfper Relieu 21 244-2)2 Hurst R amp Milkenr 11 (1996) Facilitaring successful prediccion problem gt(living in
biology through application ofskill theor jOllnJal ill Scimce ) 541-)52
Inhclder fl amp Piager j (19)8) the cililrflIor1I IlrO-fi((
Jew York Basic fI()oks
Jarvin L amp Subomik R (2006) Understanding elitc taient ill acadcmil domaim A
dcvclopmcl1(al ttajccwn from hasic ahilities O scholarlv producrivitvcmisfr In E A Dixon amp S 1 Moon (Eek) thc hillidbook (pp205-220) vhco TX Prufrock Press
Kancsky L (1)92) Gifred children and thc learning process Imights on both tlom rhe
rcsearch III E Miinks amp Xi Peters (Eds) J(tlmr r1( (pp 1))middot161) Asscn
Ihe 0lctherlands Van CorClUll
Kanevsky L amp KeighlcvL (2003) 1~) produce or nor ro produce understanding hOi dum and the honor in umkrlchkl111cnr RCIitll26 2()2R
Kauflll]n J C Gentile C r amp Bllf J (200)) Do gifted sflllknr writers and crec)(ive
writing experts raIL lTlcni in till same Child QlltlltCrl 4) 2()O-265 King P v1 amp Kitchener K S (1)94) jll(zr1II IllI
flild illtcllltfli ill flrocsCm fllld (lIn San
Francisco Josse~ Bass
King l 1 amp Kitchencr K S (2004) Iefieltivc judgllllm Ihcorv and research on thl
dtveioplllelH ()f pircmic assllmptions through adulrhood Fdilolfiolltll
YJ(I) )-lR
Kitchener K S (1 )HI) Cogllition Il1ctalugnirioll and episttmic cognition A rhrcltlevel
model of cognitivc pnllc fl1I11II11I )11 dOjJ 1IItl1 I 6 222~252 Klein J T (I ))3) Blurring CLIcking mel crossing Permcation and thc fracturing of
discipline In E lesscr-DlidO D R ShUlllV amp D J Shan (Eds) (Pl 1 Hi-21 I) Charlnwsdle Uniersin
of Virginia Press
Kloss R J (19)4) nudge is hest Helping srudems throllgh rhe Iern schellll of intll
Iccruat Jeel0pllhnr I] I i 1-1 lH
Kronholm M 1 (19J) l Ihe i mp)ct of dCIdnpmenral instruction on rcHen ill iudgmellL
RCIieU ofHigber ErlIldtillll I i 1))-middot2)) Larson R V amp Richmk 1 11 1 L)J 1 ugusr) Boredom in (hi middle scilll() I
ears Blaming schoolgt erus gtIamitlg mdenrs 1l11encdll jOIiJIiI OjliJI(I[JOII 9)
418-44) Lmell C X amp 0unnen j i 2()()i i Tesling the adulr dCelopme1( I()CI of [lahel
hvpothesis HOI1l0gillCOll hmiddot lln position mllaboldtile learning groups and grcldu
ate student sarisfanion tllrtr 11 IY) 1)0
A Guide to Recommended Practices
L GtgtLlA(HER18
Ludlow B L amp Voodrum D T (1)82) Problem-sohing and aerag~
Icarners on a multiple discrimination task (ild
Matthews D amp lkLwghlin T 1)94) EHects otleHIlr-cclHcln acthitics on
achievement and students preterences in [So hiih 5c11Ol lLtrSes HI(tPWdl
fllld AOo)li -8 28)-286 ivlcDonJkl J (I )Kl) Cogniric dcnlopmenr Jnd the rlUdU or geometric contcllr
Rlslrd ill f(ltbcJlldti f((cilwm 20 -11-)4
vlontlgue 1 (19() 1 J Cihnl and Icnning diabkd gifrcd smdllls lise of knowledge and
usc of mrriHIllHicli and prohlem sohing srrarcgic I I(uuioll oftII
11 Y))-+II
middotluis K (2004) ierson(rl cpisrcmologv and marhcmuics - critical rcic and smhesis
of research RcIlli lifdll(lIli()Ii Retii -1 31--3-- Neher H amp Scholllnllr-middotikim 1 (20021 Sclf-regubted ilIKC with hiohl
gitted students l11e rok of cogn it i l l110t i UiOll] L pist cillologicd md cm [ron l1](llshy
[11 (1liahle linif Stili lin 3( I i iC)_-I
Nelson C E (I )8)) Skcwered on th unicorns horn 111lt iluion or the rr(lckotf between content and LTitk1 thinking in the lcaching otsliLllcC [n L X row (Edi
(nth II iii hI j(ltIlaquo rpp 17_-) (lshingrotl DC ]11[onll
Scimee (ltrehers AsOl iou ion
Nelson c E (1 )9() Studellt dicrsir rCl]uircs ditknm appro(lLhcs to collqc tcaciling
Cln in math llld sckncc iIIlT(dl Fiehtllltl(ri S((illhl -10 1(1)-1)
Niaz L amp Robinson Xi (1 j)2) IW1l algllrithmic mode [(l Ol1ccprur1 gCs[1lt in
1Il1lkrstanding rill blhavior of gibe An cpiSlclllOiogic11 pcrspccric Rt(Igt ii)(fshy
IIII 0 ic(bliologiCd hhl(iltiOi J(J )5-(H
Ilttry V ( II (I JeD) hJlII ojilferlld tllirl erb(lt r(ICOPJltJ iii tilt ieiln J Idllltll NeW York Holt Rinehart amp iINon
Plucker J A amp kInrire J (1 l9()) lldel11il sllnilbilin ill high-pOIClHill middle school StlldllltS Cifra (hlld I() --1middot1
Rahinmviu 0 CIar R (llJH)) Cq rulturc Ilnd proces in high U)11Pl lent plrr()rmOlllcmiddot In I D Horcmill 0 1 OBrkn ([k) 111 1111r1Ii1fmte4
11 perpeelIlc (PI -)-)8) ahjn~[oil DC rmCIIlCn ycltologkJI
-soc ia[i 0 n
RohimoJl amp Clinkcnbeard l R (1 ))8) Clftcdncss An cxccprlonaiirv examined
AIIlliltl1 RIIicll j) 11- 151
Ruh1I1 L amp RcI S ((()() Pancrn ohdi~rcglliatiotl jl(men of strHcS
lISC 11llOllg I[)v-Khiing mel high-lchicing univnsin sludlHs ROi lt11leu 8 14K-I
Rv(m 1 (I )k+) loniwring [Xl (ol1lprci1lnsion Inciiidud dirkrcllns in
ul gttandards JOIIiIId
SaL U (2004) A npls ()fhiftd adobccnrsoilld
Schummll 1 (I ))l 11 lOllccprualilllriol1 O(CpiSlcllloiogical hdicl~ and thcir
role 011 kamint In R (lrtlCr ( i A Alexander (Lds) dOllIiX( lid ilitJlC
(iOIl Itit tCXI 2i--fOI liillbJc 1 LlTClllC Erlblllll1
Scitorn1l1er 1 amp DUIlIlLil l 1Jrl Epistcmologicti bdd~ or littcd high chuol
studcllls RalIi 19 1-middot1 )(
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
SChOlllll1(
enul
J7I Shieci
d ir )l)-
Shore II
chilei JlIT
Shore H
dllf
i( ) Sowell
1()
i
Span I
Stcinc I
a rmiddot fl]
SrlillC1 i
In Srcrnh~l
L f Slnnh_
(
Suhotl1~
fhollLh
ch
11lt 111 __
~ ~ tcshy
ri
choo
DESICNED FiT
Schommer-AikinsL Duell 0 K amp Hurter R (2005) Epistemological mathshy
emarical probkm-solving beliefs and academic of middle school students
Ihe 105289-304 Shieer S amp ]1aker C J 199-) Enrichment and acceleration An meniew 1I1d new
directions In ~ Colangelo amp C Davis Haildboo edllcation 99-110) Boston Allm amp Bacon
Shore B M (2000) ktacognitiol1 and Hexibilitmiddot differences in how gifted
children think In R C Friedman amp B 1 Shore (Elk) rllllts ulljf)dillg CogshylIitioli and dlleopllllt 16--1Sn vrashil1gton DC American PsChological
Association
Shore B 1 amp Irving J (200j) Inquirv as a Il(dagogicallink hetween expnie lnc
giftedness111e lbili( lI1d inquin resc1ch group at 1cCili Lnhmiddotcrir
fwd tofld IlIteliirUllilidl O( 1)5-40
Shore B fL amp Lazar 1 (1996) differences in time alltlcatiol1 Irhlc-m
-8 11411-S49
Sowell L R 1cters()ll B S lhol11pon P 1 e1cuIllLmiddot S [ Il~nklt nill L amp lc)gl A V (2003l bpping cortical Cross rhe human lit~ pan MUIII
iVmoicillIr( () 309-51 i
Span )1 amp Oertool11-COrSIll iL R (19H6) Informatioll ng hmiddot intellectual
pupils sullillg Illarhcmuical prohlems Frill(tlliolldl Stil 1 Alarfeillrltio -
273-291 SteineL H H amp Carr 1 12(05) C
more preci undersundinf of Hrclgr RIIiCli 15 21)-21
denmiddotlopl11lnt in children Toward
di fferenccs ill i mel Iigencl Ldi(tltlOlIr
Stcimmiddotr H H amp Clrr 1 (200() 1 r(ldolIIl11t oproJIeil -ollilI Iii gijicrl lllirl Ilmgl~iiil) (fidllll lc(rr(J liml d(fo(illiilt to edliCtiolliI
I-bllppauge lY Ioa Science
Srnnbcrg R J (Ed) (191-12) flIIrll)(o ahliililll illllllgolec ~e York Cambridge
Unlnsir Press
StLrnberg RI (2()()~ L hroJd ie or il1telligencefllc thl(l~ of sllcccssful
COllilltilig lotrildmiddot Jritti(1 illlt R(tllc 55 15)-1 i-l
Sllbotnik R F (2()(Ul doicC1[ pathway to lmll1LIllC ill seicnlL Lcsom irom the
music COIlSLratoIY III P CLTmch- amp L ledcrlllltln (hisl SUOi([ (rII(lItioll [tllII
rnmitllloi( i1Hd pllblli 2)i-502) Burke lOS Pre
lhonl1sI- (200S) RCiing and
ethnicity Il()n~ gifted high SdlOUI sllIdcJl(
Wluing 1 (1989) Logical IllCe-sln to mlkc line graphs j(llnldl itl middotcima J( 3-1-3 -q
Veins[Ock 1 )culllan Y amp iaiuk 1 2()) I) liing thc point or [hL nomh
of wdcllts to icklltit Ltliaiouo argumiddot I11cnts )( 1) -94
Wilkinson V K amp 1)lt)1 i Ih influencc of collegc stmle-nt
logical Ull clecrlLi to h- i 11 ~ prO(SL~ ([Ier rcb iN UJ~Ji()
Vilkinsoll X K amp Sdmart l II I 9fCllhc oricllLltioll I gittLd
adolcsccnrs 11 tL (d 11[ model Reports hJ r6-l)-k
Young E (2001 hyJun(i rlh l)uildillg blocks ()tlir~ fJ COlriu j(gt--+H
A Guide to Recommended Practices
19
GALLAGHER20
Yurgelun-1()dd D A amp Kilgore X D (2006) harmiddotmiddotre8ted acridt in the prefrontal
cortex increases with age during adolescence A preliminary f1RI study Neuroscience Lmer406194-19()
Zhang L F (J 999) Furrher cross-cultural validation of rill theory of menul self-governshymenr journal 133 16)-1)1
Zhang L F amp atkins D (200 II Cognitivc dcvcloplllll1t llld stUdcnt approaches to
learning An investigation ofPerns theor~ vith Clullcse and US uniersitv students Higher EduCfltiol1 41239-2(1
SUSANr
We
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
i
GALLAGHER16
References
Arlin P K amp Levin L (1998) A deelopmenta perspc((ic on giftedness
HeetlrcIoltnlld I )4~~5i(1 Baxter Jvlagolda Jvl B (J 987) Comparing open-ended inteljcs lnd standardized mea- Hair
sun of inrelieefUal development ollilla Strfmt PCIJoiJle 28 443~44S -i
BdL E (2004) Promoring StUdUHS argumenr consrrncriOll and collahorativc debate in thc Hell science classfl)om rn ~ 1 C Linn E A Davis amp P Bell (Eds J Imimlt J1lrOltrrIOtS h~middot
seimC IIiCilioll (pp 11 i-145) lal11ah 1 Lawrence Erlballl11
rkrningcr V amp Yates C (J (95) Formal operational thought in rhe gifted A postshy H(ln~
Piagetian pnspecriC Hu(ti (nilli I) 220~224 HUN
Rirnn B L (l991 Formal operHional nlsolling Illodes Predictors of critical thinking
abilit ies alld grade assigned Iw reacher in sciencc and nlarhemltltics il[ student in
grades nine rhrough [tke Ollljli ill Sciei( 28 2()-2~4 InhclcL
Buehl 1 amp Alnlnder P (2001) lorivarion and pnr~HlllaJl(e ditferemes in srudelJ[
dOllllin-specific epiSrllllUI()~illt11 bel iet profiles ilIHlIll FdllClitiolfll NCilllrchOII1i
middoti2 (N-- - 2(
ClIlO I (200i) Lpistcl]ologicai bclid~ IJlld a[lproaches to Icllning Ih~ir through lh secol1dan chool wd their influcncc Oil lCademic pn~lrn1alKe Bllti_f lotmil
tdlildtiOllit -) 205- 221 Kanl
ClIl 1 amp Alexander I (I )()6) Xhere giftd children do 1Ild do nO[ cxcel on llleracogshy
n irin lasb Noel) NcriCiI 18 12lt 1( 1)
Cherne L 11 VinrCl J amp Chlrnc j1 l (200i) NucleH problem s()h-ln~ Kanl
elise stUlh of expert-I1Oicl differences hllliSlletoll fI(the iVdmtI of
Seillle w 1-- hi 11 T H (lascL R amp iarr 1 J (itk) (19HHl Ihc Itttn If
NJ Lawrence Erlbaulll King I
CsiksCIHIll ihali 1 1 Ib rJundt K amp Whakn S ( 1 )94) ]tIIIItc tieillgcn 11( mou of I 1 JifCCC-S Iiiirifllllln Bmrou ( PrlmiddotSS ~
[lidson I L amp I I tJ)Hj)lh roll ofimighr in ilwlIeuual ~ifredncs King l
(dial Child (jlltrtal ]8 is-hi dc Urnl 1 amp lLlll~jl 1 11()()iIlhlmiddot riariollshil hcmlln 1biliriLs and slt1rshy
regllbrld Ic~lrning l ilkncc ti) imcraLTiolb with leIck-mil sdt~lomcpt Ild gender
iglllbiit) lirlI ( 2() 1 ) S
Felder R (19~J 1 kCl our s1Udenrs Dac hrrlLl and Ruhcllo ChtlJiicd KItin
Fdll(iltOi31 10(- j() d Cllb~hcr J l-Llrrallilll C ( 0 (olcn1lt1ll ~1 R (J 9F) UlilIkllgc or boredom Ciftld Ii
tlldIHS ics on rhir ((Pi1 NUiCli 19 132~l(1 iI
Callagher S A (l)lt)H 11 he ((lld 10 ulrinl rhinking I he scheille lilt llleH1in~ht KIo I
ditttTcnriation ii Hill(IiII 8li iL)) 12-20 ic Calb~her S 1 (2()()()1 l rhmiddot to slience expcrtiscmiddot In F Dixon amp S Kronl](I
0100[1 ( l IitI)i u (lllllIO1 [PI 1()~middot+6(J) I1U) TX (n
Irufroc k Prns larson 1
CipsoJ] 1 brdulll 1 0 Ic1111ll L t 19S)1 Rcll(ollhil hC[Cll1 t(lrmal-opltTniullll dlOughr and ttllhclrud ditkulrie in geflLtiS problem IUIilidl ofRlsldJ(f ill --I J gt~
Slilll( ( S 1 1--S2 I Loell (
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
17 DESIGNED TO fiT
ul
IX
Gorodetsky 1 amp Klavir R (2003) What can we learn from how giftedaverage pupils
describe their processes of problem solving) Learning amp Instruction 13 305-326 Grabner R Neubauer A amp Srern E (2006) Superior performance and neural efficiencv
Ihe impact of intelligence and expertise Brain Research Bulletin 69 422-439 Haicr R J JUl1g R E Yeo R A Head K amp Alkire M r (200t) Srrllcrural brain
variHion and general inrelligence Netlroimage J L 425-435 Henderson S (J 995) Vh do I hae ro be here) The Advanced Placement srudelH in
firs(~vear composition Problems and isslles in cognitive development journal ondar) Gifted EduCtlri(Jl 7 )24-532
Hong L (19)9) Swdying the mind of rhe gifted ROfper Relieu 21 244-2)2 Hurst R amp Milkenr 11 (1996) Facilitaring successful prediccion problem gt(living in
biology through application ofskill theor jOllnJal ill Scimce ) 541-)52
Inhclder fl amp Piager j (19)8) the cililrflIor1I IlrO-fi((
Jew York Basic fI()oks
Jarvin L amp Subomik R (2006) Understanding elitc taient ill acadcmil domaim A
dcvclopmcl1(al ttajccwn from hasic ahilities O scholarlv producrivitvcmisfr In E A Dixon amp S 1 Moon (Eek) thc hillidbook (pp205-220) vhco TX Prufrock Press
Kancsky L (1)92) Gifred children and thc learning process Imights on both tlom rhe
rcsearch III E Miinks amp Xi Peters (Eds) J(tlmr r1( (pp 1))middot161) Asscn
Ihe 0lctherlands Van CorClUll
Kanevsky L amp KeighlcvL (2003) 1~) produce or nor ro produce understanding hOi dum and the honor in umkrlchkl111cnr RCIitll26 2()2R
Kauflll]n J C Gentile C r amp Bllf J (200)) Do gifted sflllknr writers and crec)(ive
writing experts raIL lTlcni in till same Child QlltlltCrl 4) 2()O-265 King P v1 amp Kitchener K S (1)94) jll(zr1II IllI
flild illtcllltfli ill flrocsCm fllld (lIn San
Francisco Josse~ Bass
King l 1 amp Kitchencr K S (2004) Iefieltivc judgllllm Ihcorv and research on thl
dtveioplllelH ()f pircmic assllmptions through adulrhood Fdilolfiolltll
YJ(I) )-lR
Kitchener K S (1 )HI) Cogllition Il1ctalugnirioll and episttmic cognition A rhrcltlevel
model of cognitivc pnllc fl1I11II11I )11 dOjJ 1IItl1 I 6 222~252 Klein J T (I ))3) Blurring CLIcking mel crossing Permcation and thc fracturing of
discipline In E lesscr-DlidO D R ShUlllV amp D J Shan (Eds) (Pl 1 Hi-21 I) Charlnwsdle Uniersin
of Virginia Press
Kloss R J (19)4) nudge is hest Helping srudems throllgh rhe Iern schellll of intll
Iccruat Jeel0pllhnr I] I i 1-1 lH
Kronholm M 1 (19J) l Ihe i mp)ct of dCIdnpmenral instruction on rcHen ill iudgmellL
RCIieU ofHigber ErlIldtillll I i 1))-middot2)) Larson R V amp Richmk 1 11 1 L)J 1 ugusr) Boredom in (hi middle scilll() I
ears Blaming schoolgt erus gtIamitlg mdenrs 1l11encdll jOIiJIiI OjliJI(I[JOII 9)
418-44) Lmell C X amp 0unnen j i 2()()i i Tesling the adulr dCelopme1( I()CI of [lahel
hvpothesis HOI1l0gillCOll hmiddot lln position mllaboldtile learning groups and grcldu
ate student sarisfanion tllrtr 11 IY) 1)0
A Guide to Recommended Practices
L GtgtLlA(HER18
Ludlow B L amp Voodrum D T (1)82) Problem-sohing and aerag~
Icarners on a multiple discrimination task (ild
Matthews D amp lkLwghlin T 1)94) EHects otleHIlr-cclHcln acthitics on
achievement and students preterences in [So hiih 5c11Ol lLtrSes HI(tPWdl
fllld AOo)li -8 28)-286 ivlcDonJkl J (I )Kl) Cogniric dcnlopmenr Jnd the rlUdU or geometric contcllr
Rlslrd ill f(ltbcJlldti f((cilwm 20 -11-)4
vlontlgue 1 (19() 1 J Cihnl and Icnning diabkd gifrcd smdllls lise of knowledge and
usc of mrriHIllHicli and prohlem sohing srrarcgic I I(uuioll oftII
11 Y))-+II
middotluis K (2004) ierson(rl cpisrcmologv and marhcmuics - critical rcic and smhesis
of research RcIlli lifdll(lIli()Ii Retii -1 31--3-- Neher H amp Scholllnllr-middotikim 1 (20021 Sclf-regubted ilIKC with hiohl
gitted students l11e rok of cogn it i l l110t i UiOll] L pist cillologicd md cm [ron l1](llshy
[11 (1liahle linif Stili lin 3( I i iC)_-I
Nelson C E (I )8)) Skcwered on th unicorns horn 111lt iluion or the rr(lckotf between content and LTitk1 thinking in the lcaching otsliLllcC [n L X row (Edi
(nth II iii hI j(ltIlaquo rpp 17_-) (lshingrotl DC ]11[onll
Scimee (ltrehers AsOl iou ion
Nelson c E (1 )9() Studellt dicrsir rCl]uircs ditknm appro(lLhcs to collqc tcaciling
Cln in math llld sckncc iIIlT(dl Fiehtllltl(ri S((illhl -10 1(1)-1)
Niaz L amp Robinson Xi (1 j)2) IW1l algllrithmic mode [(l Ol1ccprur1 gCs[1lt in
1Il1lkrstanding rill blhavior of gibe An cpiSlclllOiogic11 pcrspccric Rt(Igt ii)(fshy
IIII 0 ic(bliologiCd hhl(iltiOi J(J )5-(H
Ilttry V ( II (I JeD) hJlII ojilferlld tllirl erb(lt r(ICOPJltJ iii tilt ieiln J Idllltll NeW York Holt Rinehart amp iINon
Plucker J A amp kInrire J (1 l9()) lldel11il sllnilbilin ill high-pOIClHill middle school StlldllltS Cifra (hlld I() --1middot1
Rahinmviu 0 CIar R (llJH)) Cq rulturc Ilnd proces in high U)11Pl lent plrr()rmOlllcmiddot In I D Horcmill 0 1 OBrkn ([k) 111 1111r1Ii1fmte4
11 perpeelIlc (PI -)-)8) ahjn~[oil DC rmCIIlCn ycltologkJI
-soc ia[i 0 n
RohimoJl amp Clinkcnbeard l R (1 ))8) Clftcdncss An cxccprlonaiirv examined
AIIlliltl1 RIIicll j) 11- 151
Ruh1I1 L amp RcI S ((()() Pancrn ohdi~rcglliatiotl jl(men of strHcS
lISC 11llOllg I[)v-Khiing mel high-lchicing univnsin sludlHs ROi lt11leu 8 14K-I
Rv(m 1 (I )k+) loniwring [Xl (ol1lprci1lnsion Inciiidud dirkrcllns in
ul gttandards JOIIiIId
SaL U (2004) A npls ()fhiftd adobccnrsoilld
Schummll 1 (I ))l 11 lOllccprualilllriol1 O(CpiSlcllloiogical hdicl~ and thcir
role 011 kamint In R (lrtlCr ( i A Alexander (Lds) dOllIiX( lid ilitJlC
(iOIl Itit tCXI 2i--fOI liillbJc 1 LlTClllC Erlblllll1
Scitorn1l1er 1 amp DUIlIlLil l 1Jrl Epistcmologicti bdd~ or littcd high chuol
studcllls RalIi 19 1-middot1 )(
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
SChOlllll1(
enul
J7I Shieci
d ir )l)-
Shore II
chilei JlIT
Shore H
dllf
i( ) Sowell
1()
i
Span I
Stcinc I
a rmiddot fl]
SrlillC1 i
In Srcrnh~l
L f Slnnh_
(
Suhotl1~
fhollLh
ch
11lt 111 __
~ ~ tcshy
ri
choo
DESICNED FiT
Schommer-AikinsL Duell 0 K amp Hurter R (2005) Epistemological mathshy
emarical probkm-solving beliefs and academic of middle school students
Ihe 105289-304 Shieer S amp ]1aker C J 199-) Enrichment and acceleration An meniew 1I1d new
directions In ~ Colangelo amp C Davis Haildboo edllcation 99-110) Boston Allm amp Bacon
Shore B M (2000) ktacognitiol1 and Hexibilitmiddot differences in how gifted
children think In R C Friedman amp B 1 Shore (Elk) rllllts ulljf)dillg CogshylIitioli and dlleopllllt 16--1Sn vrashil1gton DC American PsChological
Association
Shore B 1 amp Irving J (200j) Inquirv as a Il(dagogicallink hetween expnie lnc
giftedness111e lbili( lI1d inquin resc1ch group at 1cCili Lnhmiddotcrir
fwd tofld IlIteliirUllilidl O( 1)5-40
Shore B fL amp Lazar 1 (1996) differences in time alltlcatiol1 Irhlc-m
-8 11411-S49
Sowell L R 1cters()ll B S lhol11pon P 1 e1cuIllLmiddot S [ Il~nklt nill L amp lc)gl A V (2003l bpping cortical Cross rhe human lit~ pan MUIII
iVmoicillIr( () 309-51 i
Span )1 amp Oertool11-COrSIll iL R (19H6) Informatioll ng hmiddot intellectual
pupils sullillg Illarhcmuical prohlems Frill(tlliolldl Stil 1 Alarfeillrltio -
273-291 SteineL H H amp Carr 1 12(05) C
more preci undersundinf of Hrclgr RIIiCli 15 21)-21
denmiddotlopl11lnt in children Toward
di fferenccs ill i mel Iigencl Ldi(tltlOlIr
Stcimmiddotr H H amp Clrr 1 (200() 1 r(ldolIIl11t oproJIeil -ollilI Iii gijicrl lllirl Ilmgl~iiil) (fidllll lc(rr(J liml d(fo(illiilt to edliCtiolliI
I-bllppauge lY Ioa Science
Srnnbcrg R J (Ed) (191-12) flIIrll)(o ahliililll illllllgolec ~e York Cambridge
Unlnsir Press
StLrnberg RI (2()()~ L hroJd ie or il1telligencefllc thl(l~ of sllcccssful
COllilltilig lotrildmiddot Jritti(1 illlt R(tllc 55 15)-1 i-l
Sllbotnik R F (2()(Ul doicC1[ pathway to lmll1LIllC ill seicnlL Lcsom irom the
music COIlSLratoIY III P CLTmch- amp L ledcrlllltln (hisl SUOi([ (rII(lItioll [tllII
rnmitllloi( i1Hd pllblli 2)i-502) Burke lOS Pre
lhonl1sI- (200S) RCiing and
ethnicity Il()n~ gifted high SdlOUI sllIdcJl(
Wluing 1 (1989) Logical IllCe-sln to mlkc line graphs j(llnldl itl middotcima J( 3-1-3 -q
Veins[Ock 1 )culllan Y amp iaiuk 1 2()) I) liing thc point or [hL nomh
of wdcllts to icklltit Ltliaiouo argumiddot I11cnts )( 1) -94
Wilkinson V K amp 1)lt)1 i Ih influencc of collegc stmle-nt
logical Ull clecrlLi to h- i 11 ~ prO(SL~ ([Ier rcb iN UJ~Ji()
Vilkinsoll X K amp Sdmart l II I 9fCllhc oricllLltioll I gittLd
adolcsccnrs 11 tL (d 11[ model Reports hJ r6-l)-k
Young E (2001 hyJun(i rlh l)uildillg blocks ()tlir~ fJ COlriu j(gt--+H
A Guide to Recommended Practices
19
GALLAGHER20
Yurgelun-1()dd D A amp Kilgore X D (2006) harmiddotmiddotre8ted acridt in the prefrontal
cortex increases with age during adolescence A preliminary f1RI study Neuroscience Lmer406194-19()
Zhang L F (J 999) Furrher cross-cultural validation of rill theory of menul self-governshymenr journal 133 16)-1)1
Zhang L F amp atkins D (200 II Cognitivc dcvcloplllll1t llld stUdcnt approaches to
learning An investigation ofPerns theor~ vith Clullcse and US uniersitv students Higher EduCfltiol1 41239-2(1
SUSANr
We
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
17 DESIGNED TO fiT
ul
IX
Gorodetsky 1 amp Klavir R (2003) What can we learn from how giftedaverage pupils
describe their processes of problem solving) Learning amp Instruction 13 305-326 Grabner R Neubauer A amp Srern E (2006) Superior performance and neural efficiencv
Ihe impact of intelligence and expertise Brain Research Bulletin 69 422-439 Haicr R J JUl1g R E Yeo R A Head K amp Alkire M r (200t) Srrllcrural brain
variHion and general inrelligence Netlroimage J L 425-435 Henderson S (J 995) Vh do I hae ro be here) The Advanced Placement srudelH in
firs(~vear composition Problems and isslles in cognitive development journal ondar) Gifted EduCtlri(Jl 7 )24-532
Hong L (19)9) Swdying the mind of rhe gifted ROfper Relieu 21 244-2)2 Hurst R amp Milkenr 11 (1996) Facilitaring successful prediccion problem gt(living in
biology through application ofskill theor jOllnJal ill Scimce ) 541-)52
Inhclder fl amp Piager j (19)8) the cililrflIor1I IlrO-fi((
Jew York Basic fI()oks
Jarvin L amp Subomik R (2006) Understanding elitc taient ill acadcmil domaim A
dcvclopmcl1(al ttajccwn from hasic ahilities O scholarlv producrivitvcmisfr In E A Dixon amp S 1 Moon (Eek) thc hillidbook (pp205-220) vhco TX Prufrock Press
Kancsky L (1)92) Gifred children and thc learning process Imights on both tlom rhe
rcsearch III E Miinks amp Xi Peters (Eds) J(tlmr r1( (pp 1))middot161) Asscn
Ihe 0lctherlands Van CorClUll
Kanevsky L amp KeighlcvL (2003) 1~) produce or nor ro produce understanding hOi dum and the honor in umkrlchkl111cnr RCIitll26 2()2R
Kauflll]n J C Gentile C r amp Bllf J (200)) Do gifted sflllknr writers and crec)(ive
writing experts raIL lTlcni in till same Child QlltlltCrl 4) 2()O-265 King P v1 amp Kitchener K S (1)94) jll(zr1II IllI
flild illtcllltfli ill flrocsCm fllld (lIn San
Francisco Josse~ Bass
King l 1 amp Kitchencr K S (2004) Iefieltivc judgllllm Ihcorv and research on thl
dtveioplllelH ()f pircmic assllmptions through adulrhood Fdilolfiolltll
YJ(I) )-lR
Kitchener K S (1 )HI) Cogllition Il1ctalugnirioll and episttmic cognition A rhrcltlevel
model of cognitivc pnllc fl1I11II11I )11 dOjJ 1IItl1 I 6 222~252 Klein J T (I ))3) Blurring CLIcking mel crossing Permcation and thc fracturing of
discipline In E lesscr-DlidO D R ShUlllV amp D J Shan (Eds) (Pl 1 Hi-21 I) Charlnwsdle Uniersin
of Virginia Press
Kloss R J (19)4) nudge is hest Helping srudems throllgh rhe Iern schellll of intll
Iccruat Jeel0pllhnr I] I i 1-1 lH
Kronholm M 1 (19J) l Ihe i mp)ct of dCIdnpmenral instruction on rcHen ill iudgmellL
RCIieU ofHigber ErlIldtillll I i 1))-middot2)) Larson R V amp Richmk 1 11 1 L)J 1 ugusr) Boredom in (hi middle scilll() I
ears Blaming schoolgt erus gtIamitlg mdenrs 1l11encdll jOIiJIiI OjliJI(I[JOII 9)
418-44) Lmell C X amp 0unnen j i 2()()i i Tesling the adulr dCelopme1( I()CI of [lahel
hvpothesis HOI1l0gillCOll hmiddot lln position mllaboldtile learning groups and grcldu
ate student sarisfanion tllrtr 11 IY) 1)0
A Guide to Recommended Practices
L GtgtLlA(HER18
Ludlow B L amp Voodrum D T (1)82) Problem-sohing and aerag~
Icarners on a multiple discrimination task (ild
Matthews D amp lkLwghlin T 1)94) EHects otleHIlr-cclHcln acthitics on
achievement and students preterences in [So hiih 5c11Ol lLtrSes HI(tPWdl
fllld AOo)li -8 28)-286 ivlcDonJkl J (I )Kl) Cogniric dcnlopmenr Jnd the rlUdU or geometric contcllr
Rlslrd ill f(ltbcJlldti f((cilwm 20 -11-)4
vlontlgue 1 (19() 1 J Cihnl and Icnning diabkd gifrcd smdllls lise of knowledge and
usc of mrriHIllHicli and prohlem sohing srrarcgic I I(uuioll oftII
11 Y))-+II
middotluis K (2004) ierson(rl cpisrcmologv and marhcmuics - critical rcic and smhesis
of research RcIlli lifdll(lIli()Ii Retii -1 31--3-- Neher H amp Scholllnllr-middotikim 1 (20021 Sclf-regubted ilIKC with hiohl
gitted students l11e rok of cogn it i l l110t i UiOll] L pist cillologicd md cm [ron l1](llshy
[11 (1liahle linif Stili lin 3( I i iC)_-I
Nelson C E (I )8)) Skcwered on th unicorns horn 111lt iluion or the rr(lckotf between content and LTitk1 thinking in the lcaching otsliLllcC [n L X row (Edi
(nth II iii hI j(ltIlaquo rpp 17_-) (lshingrotl DC ]11[onll
Scimee (ltrehers AsOl iou ion
Nelson c E (1 )9() Studellt dicrsir rCl]uircs ditknm appro(lLhcs to collqc tcaciling
Cln in math llld sckncc iIIlT(dl Fiehtllltl(ri S((illhl -10 1(1)-1)
Niaz L amp Robinson Xi (1 j)2) IW1l algllrithmic mode [(l Ol1ccprur1 gCs[1lt in
1Il1lkrstanding rill blhavior of gibe An cpiSlclllOiogic11 pcrspccric Rt(Igt ii)(fshy
IIII 0 ic(bliologiCd hhl(iltiOi J(J )5-(H
Ilttry V ( II (I JeD) hJlII ojilferlld tllirl erb(lt r(ICOPJltJ iii tilt ieiln J Idllltll NeW York Holt Rinehart amp iINon
Plucker J A amp kInrire J (1 l9()) lldel11il sllnilbilin ill high-pOIClHill middle school StlldllltS Cifra (hlld I() --1middot1
Rahinmviu 0 CIar R (llJH)) Cq rulturc Ilnd proces in high U)11Pl lent plrr()rmOlllcmiddot In I D Horcmill 0 1 OBrkn ([k) 111 1111r1Ii1fmte4
11 perpeelIlc (PI -)-)8) ahjn~[oil DC rmCIIlCn ycltologkJI
-soc ia[i 0 n
RohimoJl amp Clinkcnbeard l R (1 ))8) Clftcdncss An cxccprlonaiirv examined
AIIlliltl1 RIIicll j) 11- 151
Ruh1I1 L amp RcI S ((()() Pancrn ohdi~rcglliatiotl jl(men of strHcS
lISC 11llOllg I[)v-Khiing mel high-lchicing univnsin sludlHs ROi lt11leu 8 14K-I
Rv(m 1 (I )k+) loniwring [Xl (ol1lprci1lnsion Inciiidud dirkrcllns in
ul gttandards JOIIiIId
SaL U (2004) A npls ()fhiftd adobccnrsoilld
Schummll 1 (I ))l 11 lOllccprualilllriol1 O(CpiSlcllloiogical hdicl~ and thcir
role 011 kamint In R (lrtlCr ( i A Alexander (Lds) dOllIiX( lid ilitJlC
(iOIl Itit tCXI 2i--fOI liillbJc 1 LlTClllC Erlblllll1
Scitorn1l1er 1 amp DUIlIlLil l 1Jrl Epistcmologicti bdd~ or littcd high chuol
studcllls RalIi 19 1-middot1 )(
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
SChOlllll1(
enul
J7I Shieci
d ir )l)-
Shore II
chilei JlIT
Shore H
dllf
i( ) Sowell
1()
i
Span I
Stcinc I
a rmiddot fl]
SrlillC1 i
In Srcrnh~l
L f Slnnh_
(
Suhotl1~
fhollLh
ch
11lt 111 __
~ ~ tcshy
ri
choo
DESICNED FiT
Schommer-AikinsL Duell 0 K amp Hurter R (2005) Epistemological mathshy
emarical probkm-solving beliefs and academic of middle school students
Ihe 105289-304 Shieer S amp ]1aker C J 199-) Enrichment and acceleration An meniew 1I1d new
directions In ~ Colangelo amp C Davis Haildboo edllcation 99-110) Boston Allm amp Bacon
Shore B M (2000) ktacognitiol1 and Hexibilitmiddot differences in how gifted
children think In R C Friedman amp B 1 Shore (Elk) rllllts ulljf)dillg CogshylIitioli and dlleopllllt 16--1Sn vrashil1gton DC American PsChological
Association
Shore B 1 amp Irving J (200j) Inquirv as a Il(dagogicallink hetween expnie lnc
giftedness111e lbili( lI1d inquin resc1ch group at 1cCili Lnhmiddotcrir
fwd tofld IlIteliirUllilidl O( 1)5-40
Shore B fL amp Lazar 1 (1996) differences in time alltlcatiol1 Irhlc-m
-8 11411-S49
Sowell L R 1cters()ll B S lhol11pon P 1 e1cuIllLmiddot S [ Il~nklt nill L amp lc)gl A V (2003l bpping cortical Cross rhe human lit~ pan MUIII
iVmoicillIr( () 309-51 i
Span )1 amp Oertool11-COrSIll iL R (19H6) Informatioll ng hmiddot intellectual
pupils sullillg Illarhcmuical prohlems Frill(tlliolldl Stil 1 Alarfeillrltio -
273-291 SteineL H H amp Carr 1 12(05) C
more preci undersundinf of Hrclgr RIIiCli 15 21)-21
denmiddotlopl11lnt in children Toward
di fferenccs ill i mel Iigencl Ldi(tltlOlIr
Stcimmiddotr H H amp Clrr 1 (200() 1 r(ldolIIl11t oproJIeil -ollilI Iii gijicrl lllirl Ilmgl~iiil) (fidllll lc(rr(J liml d(fo(illiilt to edliCtiolliI
I-bllppauge lY Ioa Science
Srnnbcrg R J (Ed) (191-12) flIIrll)(o ahliililll illllllgolec ~e York Cambridge
Unlnsir Press
StLrnberg RI (2()()~ L hroJd ie or il1telligencefllc thl(l~ of sllcccssful
COllilltilig lotrildmiddot Jritti(1 illlt R(tllc 55 15)-1 i-l
Sllbotnik R F (2()(Ul doicC1[ pathway to lmll1LIllC ill seicnlL Lcsom irom the
music COIlSLratoIY III P CLTmch- amp L ledcrlllltln (hisl SUOi([ (rII(lItioll [tllII
rnmitllloi( i1Hd pllblli 2)i-502) Burke lOS Pre
lhonl1sI- (200S) RCiing and
ethnicity Il()n~ gifted high SdlOUI sllIdcJl(
Wluing 1 (1989) Logical IllCe-sln to mlkc line graphs j(llnldl itl middotcima J( 3-1-3 -q
Veins[Ock 1 )culllan Y amp iaiuk 1 2()) I) liing thc point or [hL nomh
of wdcllts to icklltit Ltliaiouo argumiddot I11cnts )( 1) -94
Wilkinson V K amp 1)lt)1 i Ih influencc of collegc stmle-nt
logical Ull clecrlLi to h- i 11 ~ prO(SL~ ([Ier rcb iN UJ~Ji()
Vilkinsoll X K amp Sdmart l II I 9fCllhc oricllLltioll I gittLd
adolcsccnrs 11 tL (d 11[ model Reports hJ r6-l)-k
Young E (2001 hyJun(i rlh l)uildillg blocks ()tlir~ fJ COlriu j(gt--+H
A Guide to Recommended Practices
19
GALLAGHER20
Yurgelun-1()dd D A amp Kilgore X D (2006) harmiddotmiddotre8ted acridt in the prefrontal
cortex increases with age during adolescence A preliminary f1RI study Neuroscience Lmer406194-19()
Zhang L F (J 999) Furrher cross-cultural validation of rill theory of menul self-governshymenr journal 133 16)-1)1
Zhang L F amp atkins D (200 II Cognitivc dcvcloplllll1t llld stUdcnt approaches to
learning An investigation ofPerns theor~ vith Clullcse and US uniersitv students Higher EduCfltiol1 41239-2(1
SUSANr
We
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
L GtgtLlA(HER18
Ludlow B L amp Voodrum D T (1)82) Problem-sohing and aerag~
Icarners on a multiple discrimination task (ild
Matthews D amp lkLwghlin T 1)94) EHects otleHIlr-cclHcln acthitics on
achievement and students preterences in [So hiih 5c11Ol lLtrSes HI(tPWdl
fllld AOo)li -8 28)-286 ivlcDonJkl J (I )Kl) Cogniric dcnlopmenr Jnd the rlUdU or geometric contcllr
Rlslrd ill f(ltbcJlldti f((cilwm 20 -11-)4
vlontlgue 1 (19() 1 J Cihnl and Icnning diabkd gifrcd smdllls lise of knowledge and
usc of mrriHIllHicli and prohlem sohing srrarcgic I I(uuioll oftII
11 Y))-+II
middotluis K (2004) ierson(rl cpisrcmologv and marhcmuics - critical rcic and smhesis
of research RcIlli lifdll(lIli()Ii Retii -1 31--3-- Neher H amp Scholllnllr-middotikim 1 (20021 Sclf-regubted ilIKC with hiohl
gitted students l11e rok of cogn it i l l110t i UiOll] L pist cillologicd md cm [ron l1](llshy
[11 (1liahle linif Stili lin 3( I i iC)_-I
Nelson C E (I )8)) Skcwered on th unicorns horn 111lt iluion or the rr(lckotf between content and LTitk1 thinking in the lcaching otsliLllcC [n L X row (Edi
(nth II iii hI j(ltIlaquo rpp 17_-) (lshingrotl DC ]11[onll
Scimee (ltrehers AsOl iou ion
Nelson c E (1 )9() Studellt dicrsir rCl]uircs ditknm appro(lLhcs to collqc tcaciling
Cln in math llld sckncc iIIlT(dl Fiehtllltl(ri S((illhl -10 1(1)-1)
Niaz L amp Robinson Xi (1 j)2) IW1l algllrithmic mode [(l Ol1ccprur1 gCs[1lt in
1Il1lkrstanding rill blhavior of gibe An cpiSlclllOiogic11 pcrspccric Rt(Igt ii)(fshy
IIII 0 ic(bliologiCd hhl(iltiOi J(J )5-(H
Ilttry V ( II (I JeD) hJlII ojilferlld tllirl erb(lt r(ICOPJltJ iii tilt ieiln J Idllltll NeW York Holt Rinehart amp iINon
Plucker J A amp kInrire J (1 l9()) lldel11il sllnilbilin ill high-pOIClHill middle school StlldllltS Cifra (hlld I() --1middot1
Rahinmviu 0 CIar R (llJH)) Cq rulturc Ilnd proces in high U)11Pl lent plrr()rmOlllcmiddot In I D Horcmill 0 1 OBrkn ([k) 111 1111r1Ii1fmte4
11 perpeelIlc (PI -)-)8) ahjn~[oil DC rmCIIlCn ycltologkJI
-soc ia[i 0 n
RohimoJl amp Clinkcnbeard l R (1 ))8) Clftcdncss An cxccprlonaiirv examined
AIIlliltl1 RIIicll j) 11- 151
Ruh1I1 L amp RcI S ((()() Pancrn ohdi~rcglliatiotl jl(men of strHcS
lISC 11llOllg I[)v-Khiing mel high-lchicing univnsin sludlHs ROi lt11leu 8 14K-I
Rv(m 1 (I )k+) loniwring [Xl (ol1lprci1lnsion Inciiidud dirkrcllns in
ul gttandards JOIIiIId
SaL U (2004) A npls ()fhiftd adobccnrsoilld
Schummll 1 (I ))l 11 lOllccprualilllriol1 O(CpiSlcllloiogical hdicl~ and thcir
role 011 kamint In R (lrtlCr ( i A Alexander (Lds) dOllIiX( lid ilitJlC
(iOIl Itit tCXI 2i--fOI liillbJc 1 LlTClllC Erlblllll1
Scitorn1l1er 1 amp DUIlIlLil l 1Jrl Epistcmologicti bdd~ or littcd high chuol
studcllls RalIi 19 1-middot1 )(
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
SChOlllll1(
enul
J7I Shieci
d ir )l)-
Shore II
chilei JlIT
Shore H
dllf
i( ) Sowell
1()
i
Span I
Stcinc I
a rmiddot fl]
SrlillC1 i
In Srcrnh~l
L f Slnnh_
(
Suhotl1~
fhollLh
ch
11lt 111 __
~ ~ tcshy
ri
choo
DESICNED FiT
Schommer-AikinsL Duell 0 K amp Hurter R (2005) Epistemological mathshy
emarical probkm-solving beliefs and academic of middle school students
Ihe 105289-304 Shieer S amp ]1aker C J 199-) Enrichment and acceleration An meniew 1I1d new
directions In ~ Colangelo amp C Davis Haildboo edllcation 99-110) Boston Allm amp Bacon
Shore B M (2000) ktacognitiol1 and Hexibilitmiddot differences in how gifted
children think In R C Friedman amp B 1 Shore (Elk) rllllts ulljf)dillg CogshylIitioli and dlleopllllt 16--1Sn vrashil1gton DC American PsChological
Association
Shore B 1 amp Irving J (200j) Inquirv as a Il(dagogicallink hetween expnie lnc
giftedness111e lbili( lI1d inquin resc1ch group at 1cCili Lnhmiddotcrir
fwd tofld IlIteliirUllilidl O( 1)5-40
Shore B fL amp Lazar 1 (1996) differences in time alltlcatiol1 Irhlc-m
-8 11411-S49
Sowell L R 1cters()ll B S lhol11pon P 1 e1cuIllLmiddot S [ Il~nklt nill L amp lc)gl A V (2003l bpping cortical Cross rhe human lit~ pan MUIII
iVmoicillIr( () 309-51 i
Span )1 amp Oertool11-COrSIll iL R (19H6) Informatioll ng hmiddot intellectual
pupils sullillg Illarhcmuical prohlems Frill(tlliolldl Stil 1 Alarfeillrltio -
273-291 SteineL H H amp Carr 1 12(05) C
more preci undersundinf of Hrclgr RIIiCli 15 21)-21
denmiddotlopl11lnt in children Toward
di fferenccs ill i mel Iigencl Ldi(tltlOlIr
Stcimmiddotr H H amp Clrr 1 (200() 1 r(ldolIIl11t oproJIeil -ollilI Iii gijicrl lllirl Ilmgl~iiil) (fidllll lc(rr(J liml d(fo(illiilt to edliCtiolliI
I-bllppauge lY Ioa Science
Srnnbcrg R J (Ed) (191-12) flIIrll)(o ahliililll illllllgolec ~e York Cambridge
Unlnsir Press
StLrnberg RI (2()()~ L hroJd ie or il1telligencefllc thl(l~ of sllcccssful
COllilltilig lotrildmiddot Jritti(1 illlt R(tllc 55 15)-1 i-l
Sllbotnik R F (2()(Ul doicC1[ pathway to lmll1LIllC ill seicnlL Lcsom irom the
music COIlSLratoIY III P CLTmch- amp L ledcrlllltln (hisl SUOi([ (rII(lItioll [tllII
rnmitllloi( i1Hd pllblli 2)i-502) Burke lOS Pre
lhonl1sI- (200S) RCiing and
ethnicity Il()n~ gifted high SdlOUI sllIdcJl(
Wluing 1 (1989) Logical IllCe-sln to mlkc line graphs j(llnldl itl middotcima J( 3-1-3 -q
Veins[Ock 1 )culllan Y amp iaiuk 1 2()) I) liing thc point or [hL nomh
of wdcllts to icklltit Ltliaiouo argumiddot I11cnts )( 1) -94
Wilkinson V K amp 1)lt)1 i Ih influencc of collegc stmle-nt
logical Ull clecrlLi to h- i 11 ~ prO(SL~ ([Ier rcb iN UJ~Ji()
Vilkinsoll X K amp Sdmart l II I 9fCllhc oricllLltioll I gittLd
adolcsccnrs 11 tL (d 11[ model Reports hJ r6-l)-k
Young E (2001 hyJun(i rlh l)uildillg blocks ()tlir~ fJ COlriu j(gt--+H
A Guide to Recommended Practices
19
GALLAGHER20
Yurgelun-1()dd D A amp Kilgore X D (2006) harmiddotmiddotre8ted acridt in the prefrontal
cortex increases with age during adolescence A preliminary f1RI study Neuroscience Lmer406194-19()
Zhang L F (J 999) Furrher cross-cultural validation of rill theory of menul self-governshymenr journal 133 16)-1)1
Zhang L F amp atkins D (200 II Cognitivc dcvcloplllll1t llld stUdcnt approaches to
learning An investigation ofPerns theor~ vith Clullcse and US uniersitv students Higher EduCfltiol1 41239-2(1
SUSANr
We
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
~ ~ tcshy
ri
choo
DESICNED FiT
Schommer-AikinsL Duell 0 K amp Hurter R (2005) Epistemological mathshy
emarical probkm-solving beliefs and academic of middle school students
Ihe 105289-304 Shieer S amp ]1aker C J 199-) Enrichment and acceleration An meniew 1I1d new
directions In ~ Colangelo amp C Davis Haildboo edllcation 99-110) Boston Allm amp Bacon
Shore B M (2000) ktacognitiol1 and Hexibilitmiddot differences in how gifted
children think In R C Friedman amp B 1 Shore (Elk) rllllts ulljf)dillg CogshylIitioli and dlleopllllt 16--1Sn vrashil1gton DC American PsChological
Association
Shore B 1 amp Irving J (200j) Inquirv as a Il(dagogicallink hetween expnie lnc
giftedness111e lbili( lI1d inquin resc1ch group at 1cCili Lnhmiddotcrir
fwd tofld IlIteliirUllilidl O( 1)5-40
Shore B fL amp Lazar 1 (1996) differences in time alltlcatiol1 Irhlc-m
-8 11411-S49
Sowell L R 1cters()ll B S lhol11pon P 1 e1cuIllLmiddot S [ Il~nklt nill L amp lc)gl A V (2003l bpping cortical Cross rhe human lit~ pan MUIII
iVmoicillIr( () 309-51 i
Span )1 amp Oertool11-COrSIll iL R (19H6) Informatioll ng hmiddot intellectual
pupils sullillg Illarhcmuical prohlems Frill(tlliolldl Stil 1 Alarfeillrltio -
273-291 SteineL H H amp Carr 1 12(05) C
more preci undersundinf of Hrclgr RIIiCli 15 21)-21
denmiddotlopl11lnt in children Toward
di fferenccs ill i mel Iigencl Ldi(tltlOlIr
Stcimmiddotr H H amp Clrr 1 (200() 1 r(ldolIIl11t oproJIeil -ollilI Iii gijicrl lllirl Ilmgl~iiil) (fidllll lc(rr(J liml d(fo(illiilt to edliCtiolliI
I-bllppauge lY Ioa Science
Srnnbcrg R J (Ed) (191-12) flIIrll)(o ahliililll illllllgolec ~e York Cambridge
Unlnsir Press
StLrnberg RI (2()()~ L hroJd ie or il1telligencefllc thl(l~ of sllcccssful
COllilltilig lotrildmiddot Jritti(1 illlt R(tllc 55 15)-1 i-l
Sllbotnik R F (2()(Ul doicC1[ pathway to lmll1LIllC ill seicnlL Lcsom irom the
music COIlSLratoIY III P CLTmch- amp L ledcrlllltln (hisl SUOi([ (rII(lItioll [tllII
rnmitllloi( i1Hd pllblli 2)i-502) Burke lOS Pre
lhonl1sI- (200S) RCiing and
ethnicity Il()n~ gifted high SdlOUI sllIdcJl(
Wluing 1 (1989) Logical IllCe-sln to mlkc line graphs j(llnldl itl middotcima J( 3-1-3 -q
Veins[Ock 1 )culllan Y amp iaiuk 1 2()) I) liing thc point or [hL nomh
of wdcllts to icklltit Ltliaiouo argumiddot I11cnts )( 1) -94
Wilkinson V K amp 1)lt)1 i Ih influencc of collegc stmle-nt
logical Ull clecrlLi to h- i 11 ~ prO(SL~ ([Ier rcb iN UJ~Ji()
Vilkinsoll X K amp Sdmart l II I 9fCllhc oricllLltioll I gittLd
adolcsccnrs 11 tL (d 11[ model Reports hJ r6-l)-k
Young E (2001 hyJun(i rlh l)uildillg blocks ()tlir~ fJ COlriu j(gt--+H
A Guide to Recommended Practices
19
GALLAGHER20
Yurgelun-1()dd D A amp Kilgore X D (2006) harmiddotmiddotre8ted acridt in the prefrontal
cortex increases with age during adolescence A preliminary f1RI study Neuroscience Lmer406194-19()
Zhang L F (J 999) Furrher cross-cultural validation of rill theory of menul self-governshymenr journal 133 16)-1)1
Zhang L F amp atkins D (200 II Cognitivc dcvcloplllll1t llld stUdcnt approaches to
learning An investigation ofPerns theor~ vith Clullcse and US uniersitv students Higher EduCfltiol1 41239-2(1
SUSANr
We
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students
GALLAGHER20
Yurgelun-1()dd D A amp Kilgore X D (2006) harmiddotmiddotre8ted acridt in the prefrontal
cortex increases with age during adolescence A preliminary f1RI study Neuroscience Lmer406194-19()
Zhang L F (J 999) Furrher cross-cultural validation of rill theory of menul self-governshymenr journal 133 16)-1)1
Zhang L F amp atkins D (200 II Cognitivc dcvcloplllll1t llld stUdcnt approaches to
learning An investigation ofPerns theor~ vith Clullcse and US uniersitv students Higher EduCfltiol1 41239-2(1
SUSANr
We
Programs and Services for Gifted Secondary Students