Cen

ter f

or G

ifted

Educ

atio

nTh

e C

olle

ge o

f Will

iam

& M

arySystems

N e w s l e t t e rFall, 2007 P.O. Box 8795, Williamsburg, VA 23187-8795 Volume 16 Number 1

cfge.wm.edu

In This IssueHow We Know, Not What We Know, Matters Most..................................................................1From the Editors......................................................................................................................2Executive Director’s Remarks..................................................................................................4An Interview with Three Leaders in the Field of Mathematics and Gifted Education..............6Dissertation Abstracts..............................................................................................................7New Science Units for Primary Grades...................................................................................8What’s Happening at the Center.............................................................................................10Empirical Research on Mathematics and Science in Gifted Education: An Annotated Bibliography.....................................................................................................12Creativity in the Classroom: An Interview with Michael Clay Thompson...............................15

How We Know, Not What We Know,Matters Most: Why Students Should

Design Their Own Experiments

Johns Hopkins University’s President William Brody, inhis 2007 commencement speech to JHU graduates,said:

“No serious scientist says that everything we know todaywill still be correct tomorrow. Far from it. I teach a class inwhich I tell my students that half of what they learn here mayone day be proved wrong. If we could only figure out which50 percent is wrong, we could cut their schoolingtime in half.” (Brody, 2007, available athttp://www.jhu.edu/commencement/speeches/brody.html)

For most pre-college students, almost all of theirtime in science class is spent learning what scientists“know”. Many textbooks present scientific ideas as if theyhad been handed down at Mt. Sinai, divorced from theexperimental evidence that underlies them. This focus onwhat scientists “know” is reinforced by the strong pressure

for students to demonstrate what they have learned bypassing standardized tests. Unfortunately, scientificprogress will continue to be rapid, and much of theinformation taught in pre-college science classes in 2007will be outdated – “wrong” – by 2017.

This is a problem not only for science teachersand textbook publishers, but for the general public. Cynicssay that there’s no point in paying attention to what“scientists say”, since it seems to shift with every newscycle. Butter was bad for you, and margarine was thehealthy substitute; now margarine, with its high transfatcontent, is bad for you, and butter is the safer alternative.Beta carotene was an essential addition to every vitaminpill, its antioxidant properties thought likely to preventcancer; now, it’s dangerous, having been shown to actuallyincrease the likelihood of developing lung cancer insmokers, and some scientists question the advisability of

taking vitamin supplements at all. The heavilyadvertised painkiller Vioxx was safer thanaspirin; now, Vioxx causes heart attacks, andhas been removed from the market. Evenelementary school verities are threatened.Pluto was the ninth planet; now, Pluto’s not aplanet at all.

How can teachers and schooladministrators prepare students for thescientific changes that they will experienceover the course of a lifetime? The key is toteach even the youngest students thatscience is a process, not a collection of“facts”: students need to develop a strong,intuitive understanding of how science works.They need to understand how we know, notjust what we know.

Many pre-college textbooks containchapters on the “scientific method”: the ideathat scientists first form hypotheses, then testtheir hypotheses experimentally, then analyzetheir results to find out whether the hypothesisis true or false. The problem with thesechapters is that they are too abstract, and thatthey leave out too much of the scientificprocess. As a child, I wondered how scientistscame up with hypotheses in the first place,and what happened after the hypotheses had

been tested. My excellent high school science

courses helped answer some of thesequestions for me, because I had theopportunity not only to perform the many well-designed textbook experiments laid out by my1970s-era textbooks, but to struggle withdesigning my own experiments in my PhysicsII and Biology II courses. My teachers, Dr.Kim Mehlbach and Mr. Rod Bolin, hadstockrooms full of equipment that studentscould use for their required research projects.The experiments that I designed andperformed, despite their many scientificlimitations, showed me that I could askquestions of Mother Nature and get answers-or at least data, messy and confusing as itsometimes was.

My sons, who were high schoolstudents from 1999 to 2006, had a verydifferent high school science experience frommine. Although they took Avanced Placement(AP) science courses, they did very little labwork, and never had the opportunity to designtheir own experiments. Most of their classtime was spent in lecture, in reading, inlecture review, or in exams. The pressure wason to cover the material, and cover the

material they did. The sense of excitementthat I remember from my high school sciencecourses was totally absent from ourconversations about what they did in class,even though they earned consistent 5’s ontheir AP exams.

Thus, I was delighted when myfreshman son, Nick, called me one afternoonlast spring to share an amusing scientificexperience. That morning, he had managedto wake up and get dressed by theunreasonably early hour of 11:00 AM toattend Haverford’s annual Demo Day, stagedon the College’s cricket field by the ChemistryDepartment. He enthusiastically describedthe best demonstrations he had seen. Hisfavorites were the explosions, naturally.“Demo” can be translated either as“demonstration” or as “demolition.”

In the most complicated demo, theprofessor in charge of Demo Day hadattached a large balloon filled with methanegas to a long pole, and then, holding the otherend of the pole, maneuvered the balloon untilit touched an open flame. A moderate bangresulted; as Nick explained to me, methane is

Continued on page 3, Experiments

Experiments(cont’d form page 1)

The focus of the current issue of Systems is Math and Science for gifted learners. Dr. Bev Sher of the College of William and Mary andfrequent collaborator with the Center provides an argument for the importance of students designing their own experiments to ensuretheir understanding of the scientific method and scientific thinking. Valija C. Rose, doctoral student at the Center interviewed three major

academics in the field on the topic of gifted education and math instruction. The annotated bibliography on recent math and sciencepublications was also compiled by Ms. Rose.

Also included in this issue is an interview with Michael Clay Thompson conducted by Dr. Suzanne Henshon, a graduate of the doctoralprogram William and Mary, abstracts from the dissertations from this year's graduates, as well as an update on some recent changes andhappenings at the Center.

2008 will be the 20th anniversary of the Center for Gifted Education. Stay tuned for information on our plans to celebrate.Join us at our National Curriculum Network Conference, March 5-7, where much of the action will occur!

From the Editor

2S

not especially flammable. Next, the professorattached a large balloon filled with hydrogengas to the pole and touched it to the flame.The crowd expected a miniature version ofthe Hindenburg disaster, but wasdisappointed; while there was a loud bang, itdid not meet anyone’s expectations. When alarge balloon filled with a mixture of hydrogenand oxygen gas was touched to the flame,though, the fireball was at least ten feet high,and the explosion was audible inside Nick’snearby dormitory, making his sleepy friendscome running out to see what was happening.

Nick explained that the lastexplosion had been much larger than the purehydrogen explosion because essentiallyevery hydrogen molecule in the last balloonwas close to an oxygen molecule, allowing allof the molecules present in the balloon toreact with each other at once. In his collegechemistry course, he had learned aboutexothermic reactions and the factors thatinfluence their rates and so the idea thatthoroughly mixing the reactants in advanceled to a more satisfying explosion did notsurprise him. The demo hadn’t taught himanything new, but it had been great fun.

Memorable as Demo Day was, itwas not the most valuable scientificexperience that Nick had that semester.Earlier in the spring, he had called me severaltimes in great frustration to vent about hischemistry lab course:; for the first time in hislife, he was required to design an experimentof his own. He was given the challenge ofidentifying three unknown gas samples from alist of seven different possibilities using amethod of his choice, and the open-endednature of the assignment made him veryuneasy. As Haverford’s honor code precludedhim from asking for parental help, I could onlylisten as he worried out loud.

After thinking about all of thepossible experimental approaches he couldtake, he finally settled on determining thedensity of each gas sample and thencomparing the measured densities of hisunknowns with the textbook-provideddensities of the “known” gases. First, hemeasured the volumes of his gas samples byimmersing the balloons containing thesamples in water and subtracting the volumeof the water from the volume of the balloonplus the water. Then, he weighed each gas

sample on an analytical balance, carefullybalancing the balloon filled with gas in a largebeaker; finally, he broke the balloon to releasethe gas, then weighed the empty balloon andthe beaker, and subtracted this value from themass of the combined gas, balloon andbeaker to obtain the mass of the gas. He thendivided the mass of the gas sample by itsvolume to calculate the density of the gas.

Unfortunately, the calculateddensities of Nick’s gas samples did not line upwith the densities of the “knowns.” He wasfrustrated by the failure of his experimentaldata to conform with the textbook values, butinterpreted his experimental results as besthe could, thinking carefully about the possiblesources of systematic error in his procedure.Fortunately, his educated guesses turned outto be correct, and his lab report earned agood grade. The main problem with hismethod turned out to be that the beaker wastoo heavy for the analytical balance, so themasses that he had measured were off.

Nick did not enjoy doing thisexperiment. In fact, he told me at the end ofthe semester that his experiences inchemistry lab had cemented his decision tomajor in something other than science. As aresult of his gas experiment, though, he has amuch better intuitive understanding of thechallenges scientists face when designingexperiments and obtaining, analyzing, andevaluating experimental data than he hadbefore taking the course. This experience willserve him well in the economics and publicpolicy courses that fascinate him. Socialscientists have to be able to design studiesand collect and interpret data, too.

A student who has grappled withthe limitations of his or her own data willapproach data from other sources moreskeptically than a student who has onlyassimilated “facts” from a textbook possiblycould. This important scientific habit of mindcan be reinforced by science courses that useclass time to describe famous experimentsand their results, rather than just presentingtextbook wisdom. It can be strengthened bythe opportunity to read and discuss currentscientific papers, and to think critically aboutthe data and methods the papers describe. Astudent who has done all of these things willhave a deep, intuitive understanding of howscience really works. He or she will truly be

scientifically literate.As educators, we need to resist the

pressures that the system creates to just“cover the material.” For the good of ourstudents, and for the good of our country,which desperately needs a scientificallyliterate citizenry in order to grapple effectivelywith the major problems of our time, we needto help students to understand how we know,not just what we know. As a beginning step,we need to invest the time, energy, andmoney needed to help even our youngeststudents design and perform their ownexperiments.___________________________________Dr. Beverly Sher received her BA inMolecular, Cellular and DevelopmentalBiology and Russian from the University ofColorado in 1979, and received her Ph.D. inBiology from Caltech in 1985. Afterpostdoctoral work at Stanford andWashington University in St. Louis, sheretired from biological research to raise hersmall children. In the early 1990s, she servedas the Center for Gifted Education’s scienceconsultant during the development of theProblem Based Learning science units for K-8 students. She is currently a VisitingAssistant Professor of Biology at the Collegeof William and Mary, where she teaches afreshman seminar on emerging infectiousdiseases and serves as the College’s HealthProfessions Advisor.

3

Experiments(cont’d from page 2)

Systems is a newsletter published by:The Center for Gifted Education

427 Scotland StreetWilliamsburg, VA 23185

Postal Address: Center for Gifted Education The College of William and Mary

P.O. Box 8795Williamsburg, VA 23187-8795

Phone: 757-221-2362; Fax: 757-221-2184Web Address: www.cfge.wm.edu

email address: cfge@wm.eduExecutive Director: Dr. Joyce VanTassel-Baska

Systems Editor: Dawn BensonDesign/Layout/Technical Assistant: Sharron Gatling

4

The Quality of the Gifted Educationprogram or what do students take awaytomorrow at the ritual called

graduation?

In 1950 a high school dropout by the name ofRobert Pirsig wrote a best-selling book calledZen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance.The book chronicled the authentic quality oflife experiences to be derived from drivingacross country on a motorcycle, a decadebefore the film Easy Rider made it a truecultural phenomenon. More importantly,however, the book introduced a metaphysicalor philosophical interpretation of quality, onewhere subject and object (read romantic andclassical) actually merged into a highersynthesis. He opined that static quality wasfound in the patterns of nonliving things, inbiological systems, and in social andintellectual systems, and that these systemswere arranged in hierarchal order that led toevolutionary breakthroughs. Thus whenhigher order biology (flight of birds) couldovercome nonliving things (gravity), staticquality improved. In his system, theintellectual power of ideas was at the highestlevel as it is in Plato’s system of thought aswell. Yet this view of static quality, in Pirsig’smodel, is always interrelated with dynamicquality, the force of change in the universe(the preintellectual cutting edge of reality)where quality lies in the moment, which forartists like Virginia Woolfe meant that lifequality was best captured in moments ofbeing.

This philosophical view of quality,however, must be juxtaposed with thepractical or functional view of quality,

espoused in the worldsof business andengineering and indeededucation. That view ofquality is concerned withproduct-building thatmeets certain

specifications that satisfy perceived or realneeds of clients. These specifications include:conformance to requirements (standards ofquality based on lateral judgement), fitnessfor use (customized to specialty areaopportunities), products/services that meet orexceed client satisfaction (student andemployer perceptions of program quality),and quality assurance and managementprocesses such as speed, dependability,flexibility, and cost (effective and efficientdelivery system for the program). Thesepractical criterial standards are the basis onwhich all university programs in education arejudged and ones that allow the School ofEducation here to be considered annually inthe top 50 of schools of education nationallyby US News and World Report.

In asking graduates to reflect ontheir experiences with our program here atWilliam & Mary, it may be helpful to reflect onthe degree to which they have internalized thestandards of quality addressed in theirprogram of studies. There are 10 of them thatspeak to important aspects of learning in thisfield. They center around the importantthemes of diversity, differentiation incurriculum, instruction and assessment, andcollaboration.

Standard 1 (foundations) emphasizesthe knowledge-based foundation of the giftededucation field that traces the theoretical,historical and research-based constructscentral to understanding this specialized areaof individual differences and the manifestationof them in policies at all levels of theeducational enterprise. This component alsoemphasizes key issues and societal andeconomic factors that affect the developmentof intellectual talent more broadly. Standards2 and 3 emphasize how gifted learners aredifferent from other learners in respect tocharacteristics, developmental trajectories,and idiosyncratic ways of learning. Attentionis given to the added differences that accruebecause of cultural background, poverty, and

learning problems that sometimesaccompany giftedness.

Standards 4 and 7 focus oninstructional strategies and instructionalplanning, respectively. Standard 4emphasizes the pedagogical approaches thathave been found effective in working withgifted learners, including those from diversebackgrounds. It also stresses the importanceof using management strategies, includingassistive technology, that respond toexceptional student learning needs.Standard 7 focuses on the productsnecessary to differentiate curriculum for giftedlearners including learning plans, units, andscope and sequence documents. Emphasisis also placed on differentiation features thatcan be matched to different domains andstudent differences.

Standards 5, 6, and 10 emphasizethe nature of learning environments for thegifted that provide optimal contexts forlearning personal, social, and intellectualskills; the development of oral and writtenlanguage and communication skills atappropriate levels of advancement; and usingappropriate technologies. Moreover, thecollaboration standard focuses on themultiple types of collaboration necessary indeveloping programs for these learners fromfamilies, to school personnel, to variouscommunity groups. Standard 8 explicates theknowledge and skills essential foridentification of gifted learners, including theuse of multiple methods for findingunderrepresented populations, and theknowledge and skills needed to assesslearning in programs. Finally, Standard 9focuses on professional and ethical practicein relating to students and other individualstakeholders in the gifted educationenterprise and challenges educators to strivefor continuous improvement throughprofessional development and reflection on

Continued on page 5, Executive Director

F r o m t h e E x e c u t i v e D i r e c t o r

D r . J o y c e V a n T a s s e l - BB a s k a

S

5

practice. In addition to demonstrating competencies in these standards

of quality, our graduates are also fit in every way to fulfill the roles wehave defined as the outcomes from the program—being teacherleaders or administrators of gifted programs across the country, beingdirectors of special schools or projects nationally, or being teacher-scholars at universities. All who have actively sought such employmenthave procured it and done well.

Students and their employers (superintendents or Deans)have found that the program has allowed our students to rise to the topin their respective chosen career path. Since some were already well-respected in their career, the program has served to enhance their skillsand provided greater capacity to broaden their application to newendeavors.

Our gifted education faculty continue to work diligently atregular intervals throughout the year to improve the productivityprocesses and products of the program—from portfolios to theses anddissertation work to course design and delivery to strategies for makingthe program work for each student.

Yet the real test of quality programs, in my view, goes back tothe philosophical: how well do our students come away appreciatingthe larger picture, the connections between reason and emotion in all ofits manifestations, the need to live in the moment as well as in one’shead, and the appreciation for the role of both tradition and innovationin the world of education that they inhabit or will soon inhabit. This testof program quality is more difficult to assess, especially in the shortterm, because it speaks to lifelong habits of mind and attitudes of heartthat carve a way of being in the world—a way of being that does notdraw artificial lines between the personal and professional, between theroles of administrator and teacher, or of counselor and parent, or evenbetween educational issues such as equity and excellence in ourschools.

At an affective level, how well will our graduates cope with the“traps of stupidity” to which gifted people are prone (paraphrasingRobert Sternberg’s phraseology)? Can they handle procrastination, theblack devil that emerges from being overwhelmed and depressedbecause of work load and therefore immobilized or feelingoverconfident in the capacity to pull off big projects at the last minute?Can they learn to focus on learning goals rather than performance onesthat lead to self and other-blame for mistakes? Can they understand thedelicate balance between available energy and capacity to produce atquality levels, leading them not to overcommit or develop asuperwoman complex of being able to do it all? Can they recognize thatstriving for perfection can develop bad habits of perseveration whichleads to unfinished projects rather than treating all work as a draft inprogress? These too are questions about program quality, especially agifted program that needs to be sensitive to individual differences,emotional intensities and sensitivities, and the very real challenges ofbeing a creative producer in the real world.

At a social level, how well will our graduates demonstratecultural competency in their dealings with others of different ethnic andracial groups? How well will they truly understand the twice exceptionallearner, the one who is both gifted and disabled, and the delicatebalance in providing both support and challenge to meet needs? How

will they resist the personal desire and need to work alone with the callfor collaborative enterprise in all corners of education? How will theycope with conflict and manage to resolve it in personal and professionalmatters? How will they resist attempts at marginalization because theyare advocates for gifted students? These too are program quality issuesthat pervade work in all educational spheres that serve gifted learners.

Finally, at an intellectual level, how well will our graduates farein the world of competing ideas in education? Can they build skillfularguments that allow them to debate and hold fast to their principles?Can they craft their ideas into intellectually sound conceptualframeworks that explain the way the world works in some aspect ofeducation? Can they advocate successfully for gifted education at thelevel of the individual student as well as at the institutional level ofprograms and services? Can they exhibit both intellectual courage andhumility in dealing with others? Can they create new solutions toseemingly intractable problems in education? These are but a few of theintellectual challenges facing today’s graduates of this program.

Only each group of graduates can truly know if they are on apath that will allow their work and life to exhibit both the practical andphilosophical aspects of quality that I have briefly addressed. I onlyhope that the gifted program experience at William and Mary hasprovided some markers to assist in that journey. The Roman playwrightTerence once observed that nothing is so difficult but that it may befound out by seeking. Continue to strive to seek, and to find your placein the world of education and return often to William and Mary to shareboth your triumphs and your ongoing challenges.

Adapted from remarks made by Dr. VanTassel-Baska at the Center forGifted Education graduation luncheon.

Executive Director(cont’d from page 4)

Now Available!Contributing AuthorsBruce A. BrackenCarolyn M. CallahanBonnie CramondAnnie FengDonna FordBarbara GilmanSusan K. JohnsenKyung Hee KimMarilynn J. KuliekeJoni LakinDavid F. LohmanJack A. NaglieriPaula Olszewski-KubiliusJoseph S. RenzulliSylvia RimmNancy M. RobinsonLinda SilvermanRobert J. SternbergJoyce VanTassel-Baska

Order through Prufrock Press. Visitthe website at www.prufrock.com

Susan G. Assouline, Ed.S., Ph.D. is the associate director of theBelin-Blank Center at the University of Iowa and adjunct clinicalassociate professor in school psychology. Her research interests

include academically talented elementary students, self-concept,underachievement, and learning disabilities. She is the co-author ofDeveloping Math Talent: A Guide for Educating Gifted and AdvancedLearners in Math.

M. Katherine Gavin, Ph.D. is an associate professor at theNEAG Center for Gifted Education and Talent Development at theUniversity of Connecticut where she serves as the math specialist. Sheis currently the principal investigator and director of a five-year JavitsGrant, Project M3: Mentoring Mathematical Minds, that involves thedevelopment of math curriculum units for talented students in grades 3,4, and 5.

Linda Jensen Sheffield, Ph.D. is the Regent’s Professor atNorthern Kentucky University and executive director of the KentuckyCenter for Mathematics. She is the chair of the National Council ofTeachers of Mathematics’ Task Force on Promising Students andcoordinator of the National Association for Gifted Children SpecialStrand on Mathematics for High Ability Students. She is the author ofExtending the Challenge in Mathematics: Developing MathematicalPromise in K - 8 Students.

In these interviews, Drs. Assouline, Gavin, and Sheffieldmade observations and recommendations for gifted educators andgifted education in developing math talent. Despite their varyingbackgrounds, experiences, and hence perspectives, they share apassion for and commitment to improving the mathematics experiencesof advanced learners. Together their suggestions make a strong, clear,and cohesive call for action in our field. The piece that follows is asynthesis of their views on the issue of mathematics in gifted education.

Question: What, in your opinion, is the state of mathematics ingifted education?

Dr. Sheffield referred to the efforts that the NationalAssociation for Gifted Children (NAGC) has made in trying to addressthis very pressing issue. The organization has a math/sciencetaskforce, as well as a math/science strand at the annual conferencethat was established within the past few years. In the larger context,gifted education has been directly or indirectly responsible for improvingopportunities and experiences for numerous talented math students. Dr.Assouline declared, “Thanks to gifted educators, many mathematicallytalented students are able to move systematically through a rigorousmath curriculum, at an appropriate pace.” Some of these curricularadvances are the result of federally funded Jacob Javits grantssupporting mathematics programs and projects in gifted education.

Notwithstanding these milestones in mathematics in giftededucation, one cannot talk about the state of thefield without mentioning the impact of the No ChildLeft Behind legislation. According to Dr. Gavin, fartoo many talented students in mathematicscontinue to “sit in classrooms very bored as theclass drills on skills they already have learned.”

Clearly this indicates that there is much work to be done in order tocontinue to improve talented math students’ experiences.

Question: What role can gifted education play in the adequatepreparation of students in mathematics given the recent STEM(science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) initiativesand the increased awareness of America’s relative success inthese areas?

Gifted education can and should play a vital role in theadequate preparation of students in mathematics. Historically, giftededucation has been a leader in teaching students how to think criticallyand creatively. Emphases in the field of gifted mathematics educationhave been on challenge, rigor, patterns, generalizations, problemsolving, and problem posing. All of these elements are essential if wewant our mathematics students to compete successfully on aninternational level.

Best practices in gifted education, such as differentiationthrough depth, complexity, and curriculum compacting, identifying areasof strength, and building and maintaining student interest should beshared with regular classroom teachers. It is only through the sharing ofinformation that opportunities for students can improve.

Dr. Gavin summarized these ideas quite well in stating, “Ourpractices in gifted education encourage students not only to seekanswers but to think beyond and create new questions from theanswers they find. Through this process, students come to lovemathematics and find joy in their learning. This type of enrichmentteaching and learning is essential in helping create our futuremathematicians as world leaders and enabling America to maintain itscompetitiveness in this increasingly technological global world.”

Question: What specific recommendations would you make togifted educators as they promote and encourage math talent?

Dr. Assouline suggested that the first step we can take asgifted educators in promoting and encouraging math talent is to simplyfind talent and then to cultivate it. In discovering that talent, Dr. Sheffieldinsisted that we must look beyond traditional students. “We really needto broaden the pool… We really need to look for talent in all students,certainly in girls, students of color, [and] non traditional students.” Thisdeclaration aligns with the United States Department of Education’s1993 report, National Excellence in Developing Talent (Office onEducational Research and Improvement) which states, “Outstandingtalents are present in children and youth from all cultural groups, acrossall economic strata, and in all areas of human endeavor.”

Once talent or potential talent has been identified, thequestion then becomes how we can develop that talent. All of theinterviewees agreed that educators of the gifted must serve in bothadvocacy and facilitative roles in ensuring that talented children get theopportunities they so desperately need. Regular classroom teachersand parents must be made aware of appropriate resources, both insideand outside of schools. Additionally, we need to consider long-rangeplanning and vertical teaming opportunities as we focus on the big ideas

6

Continued on page 7, Mathematics and Gifted Education

An Interview with Three Leaders in the Fields of Mathematicsand Gifted Educationby Valija C. Rose

S

7

Mathematics and Gifted Education(cont’d from page 6)

of mathematics. Dr. Gavin argues, “We must move away fromenrichment worksheets, logic puzzles and mindbenders… Talentedstudents may enjoy these experiences by they are not enough.Students need to explore the big ideas of mathematics in depth with acohesive challenging curriculum that is designed for them over a periodof time.” Not only does this require that every high school offeradvanced placement classes in math and science as Dr. Sheffieldsuggested, but that it also requires regular and gifted teachers alike toarm themselves with rich and deep mathematical content knowledge,as Dr. Gavin suggests.

Drs. Assouline, Gavin, and Sheffield individually and collectively makea clarion call to gifted educators as we encourage and develop mathtalent. We as gifted educators must: 1) find and develop talent instudents; 2) improve opportunities for high-ability learners; 3) advocatefor a challenging cohesive curriculum that allows for continuousprogress; and 4) share gifted strategies that we know to be successfuland appropriate with this population. Although we have made gains inmathematics in gifted education, we must continue to advocate andwork tirelessly on behalf of our nation’s talented students.

This study was designed to identify inhibitors and facilitators of theeducational journey of twice exceptional students at a selectiveinstitution of higher learning. Questionnaire and interview

techniques were used to elicit responses from 13 qualified studentsabout their talent development journey. Five cases were selected basedon their uniqueness and their ability to be articulate. Parents were alsointerviewed to provide verification for student commentary andadditional insights.

Results of the study across the five cases focused on keythemes facilitating the development of these college students as well asthose that inhibited their talent development. Factors facilitating studentdevelopment included: parent support, appropriate accommodations,teacher support and positive regard, perseverance, and the willingnessto make changes in their major or career path in order to succeed.

Dissertation Abstracts

An Exploratory Study of the Academic Journey of SuccessfulTwice Exceptional Students at a Selective Institution of HigherLearningby Paula Ginsburgh

An Exploratory Study of the Use Critical and Creative Thinkingin Elementary Language Arts Classroomsby Susan MacGowan

This exploratory study examined how well elementary languagearts teachers participating in a federal project to raise students’critical thinking abilities scored on tests of critical and creative

thinking. Furthermore, it investigated the ways in which these teachersof the language arts have developed their understanding of criticalthinking skills, what types of training they bring to the classroom whichmight enhance the teaching of critical thinking skills, and the methodsby which they foster critical thinking in the classroom. Finally, this studyexamined the relationship among teacher scores on critical and creativethinking tests, their professional development hours, and results on ascale of teacher behaviors.

The study was a mixed design that employed the Watson-

Glaser Critical Thinking Assessment, the Abbreviated Torrance Test forAdults, the Wenglinsky Questionnaire, and an interview protocol.Descriptive statistics were used to analyze data and a correlation wasrun to determine if a relationship existed between tested dimensions.

Overall, the research findings suggest that experimentalteachers sought professional development options that dealt with higherorder thinking skills more regularly than did comparison teachers.Familiarity with higher order thinking skills may have enabled this groupto achieve a slightly higher score on a critical thinking test existed.Implications for practice suggest that further research should replicatethis study with a larger sample size to substantiate findings.

Continued on page 8, Dissertation

Eight science units for primary grades have been designed tointroduce young students to science concepts, scienceprocesses, and overarching concepts. A hands-on, constructivist

approach allows children to build their knowledge base and skills asthey explore science topics through active exploration and plannedinvestigations. Students are engaged in creative and critical thinking,problem finding and solving, process skill development, andcommunication opportunities. Each unit is also designed to strengthenessential concepts including quantity, direction/position, comparison,size, texture/material, shape, and time/sequence. Each unit focuses onthe overarching concept of systems or change. These units weredeveloped through Project Clarion, a curriculum intervention focusingon students in Title I schools, funded by the Jacob K. Javits Program,U.S. Department of Education.

The following eight NEW units are now available for order from theCenter for Gifted Education. Please visitwww.cfge.wm.edu/curriculum.htm for more information and an orderform.

SSuurrvviivvee aanndd TThhrriivveeSurvive and Thrive, a K-1st grade unit, engagesstudents in a study of animals, theircharacteristics, and their natural environments.Students learn how to distinguish features and lifeneeds of animals. Activities include observing andclassifying animals according to whether they are

8

Continued on page 9, Science Units

Dissertation(cont’d from page 7)

Factors inhibiting student development were: the role of the disabilitiesoffice as gate keepers, late identification, lack of accommodations atkey junctures, feelings of being different, and resource/timemanagement.

Implications for practice include: the need for educators toacquire a deeper understanding of twice exceptional students to ensuresensitivity to their condition, awareness of the twice exceptionalstudent's need for appropriate accommodations, the need forpractitioners to work closely with parents of twice exceptional students,the need for programs and provisions targeted to address both thedisability and the high ability of the twice exceptional student, and the

need to develop support systems for twice exceptional students lackingparental involvement.

Implications for future research include: an exploratory studydesigned to probe the experiences of the parents of twice exceptionalstudents, a prospective study of recently identified twice exceptionalstudents in regard to cognitive and social emotional dimensions of theirfunctioning at key transition points, creation and validation of a scale forcharacteristics of twice exceptional students that could be used at theelementary level, a longitudinal study of successful twice exceptionalstudents through age 40, and a study targeting counseling interventionsfor twice exceptional students at the middle school level.

The Effects of the Jacob's Ladder Reading ComprehensionProgram on Third, Fourth, and Fifth Grade Students' ReadingComprehension and Critical Thinking in Rural, Title I Schoolsby Tamra Stambaugh

The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of the Jacob’sLadder Reading Comprehension Program on 3rd, 4th, and 5thgrade students’ reading comprehension and critical thinking skills

in rural, Title I schools.The Jacob’s Ladder Reading Comprehension Program was

written as a supplemental curriculum targeted toward Title I students inthe third, fourth, and fifth grade. The program focuses on scaffoldingreading instruction from lower to higher level thinking skills with anemphasis on higher level thinking and textual analysis.

This quasi-experimental study measured the effects of the

program on rural Title I students’ critical thinking and readingcomprehension (N = 495). Within the experimental group, students whowere exposed to the Jacob’s Ladder curriculum revealed significant andvery high practical gains in subject-specific critical thinking behaviors.Between-group analyses suggest that when compared to the basalreader series alone, the Jacob’s Ladder Reading ComprehensionProgram produces significant and important gains in students' readingcomprehension, as measured by the Iowa Test of Basic Skills, andcritical thinking, as measured by the Test of Critical Thinking.

New Science Units for Primary Grades

9

tame or wild and living on land or in water, as well as raising mealwormsin the classroom to observe their life cycle. The concept of change isused to deepen understanding of the scientific concepts in the unit.

HHooww tthhee SSuunn MMaakkeess OOuurr DDaayyHow the Sun Makes Our Day, a K-1st grade unit,engages students in investigations andobservations that support their learning about theSun as a source of light and energy, the nature ofshadows, and the need for humans to conservenatural resources. Students explore natural andman-made sources and develop a conservationplan for their home, school, or community. The

overarching concept of change is used to deepen understanding of thescientific concepts in the unit.

WWaatteerr WWoorrkkssThe unit Water Works engages K-1st gradestudents in close observation and experimentationwith water. The overarching concept of change isreinforced as students notice, react to, reflect on,and discover more about force and change.Students ask questions and design experiments toreinforce their learning. Generalizations about howthings change are developed through students'

analysis of their findings. Students explore the characteristics of water,discover whether objects sink or float, experiment to make things float,and examine materials and their interactions with water.

BBuuddddiinngg BBoottaanniissttssBudding Botanists, a 2nd grade life science unit,engages students in a scenario-based approachto investigating plant life. While assuming the roleof botanists to understand the structure, nature,and life cycle of plants, the team members seek toanswer questions through problem solvingactivities. This unit builds upon students’ priorknowledge of plant life and encourages them to

use inquiry skills to observe, gather evidence, analyze data, and makeinferences. The overarching concept of systems is used to deepenunderstanding of the scientific concepts in the unit.

TThhee WWeeaatthheerr RReeppoorrtteerrThe Weather Reporter, a 2nd grade Earth/SpaceScience unit, provides students with opportunitiesto observe, measure, and analyze weatherphenomena. The Weather Reporter includes ascenario-based approach to allow students tomake decisions about observing, predicting, andforecasting the weather. Building upon students'prior knowledge of weather and their newly

acquired understanding of meteorology, the Weather Reporter

promotes life-long learning by encouraging students to investigatenaturally occurring weather patterns. This unit includes literary andmath components to engage students in discussions and to reinforcethe concepts addressed in the unit. Additionally, the overarchingconcept of change is used to deepen student understanding of unit'sscientific concepts.

WWhhaatt’’ss tthhee MMaatttteerrWhat’s the Matter? is a 2nd-3rd grade unit thatfocuses on the properties of solids, liquids, andgases and the processes by which matterchanges states. Students work on problem-solving scenarios where they use their newknowledge of matter, change in physicalproperties, and the measurement of matter toprepare a presentation to share new ideas and

discoveries about matter for a “science conference.” The overarchingconcept of change is used to deepen understanding of the scientificconcepts in the unit.

DDiigg IItt!!Dig It! is a 3rd grade Earth & Space science unit.Students are encouraged to investigatehumanity’s effects on the environment, theimportance of Earth’s natural resources, andsound conservation practices. Using a scenario-based approach, the unit builds upon students'prior knowledge by providing opportunities torelate local examples of environmental pollution

and conservation to hands-on scientific experiments anddemonstrations. Dig It! also includes literary and math components toengage students in discussions and to reinforce the conceptsaddressed in the unit. The overarching concept of change is used todeepen understanding of scientific concepts in this unit.

IInnvviittaattiioonn ttoo IInnvveennttInvitation to Invent, a 3rd grade unit, engagesstudents in investigations and observations thatsupport their learning about simple machines andtheir uses. Students explore force, motion, andfriction as they learn about the six simplemachines and how they are put together to formcompound machines. The overarching concept ofsystems is used to deepen understanding of the

scientific concepts in the unit.

Science Units(cont’d from page 8)

10

What’s Happening at the Center

Where are they now?This year has seen quite a few personnel changes at the Center. Whilewe are saddened by the departure of several key Center members, wewish them all the best in their new endeavors.

Dr. Elissa Brown, formerly the Director of theCenter, and a graduate of the doctoralprogram in gifted education at the College ofWilliam and Mary, has left the Center to takeon a new role as the Academically/Intellectually Gifted Consultant with the NorthCarolina Department of Public Instruction.

Dr. Annie Feng, the Center’s Research andEvaluation Coordinator, is now at the NationalCancer Institute of the National Institute ofHealth, working as a cancer research trainingaward fellow in evaluation.

Dr. Valerie Gregory worked at the Center asthe project manager for Project Clarion. Sheis now with Chesterfield County PublicSchools in Virginia, bringing her expertise tothe county in her role as assistant director ofstaff development.

New Graduate AssistantsWe are pleased to welcome the following new graduate assistants atthe Center.

Sarah Brodfueher graduated from the Collegeof William and Mary in May of 2007 with aB.A. in Government and ElementaryEducation. She is currently pursuing a M.A.Edin Secondary Education with a concentrationin Social Studies. She is very excited to beworking at the Center and is looking forwardto applying things she learns to her work inthe classroom.

Kathryn Holt is a first year graduate student inthe School of Education. She is workingtoward her masters in Couples and FamilyCounseling. Kathryn received her bachelorsdegree is Psychology from WittenbergUniversity in Ohio.

Chris McCormick is from Pasadena,Maryland. He is currently pursuing a Master'sin Gifted Education. In May of 2007, Chrisgraduated from Salisbury University, wherehe received a Bachelor of Science degree inElementary Education with minors inMathematics and Earth Science.

Kellie McKay is currently pursuing a Master’sin Gifted Education. She graduated in May of2007 with a Bachelor’s degree in ElementaryEducation and minors in Mathematics andEarth Science from Salisbury University inMaryland.

Rebecca Walter is pursuing a Master’sdegree in Gifted Education. Havinggraduated with a BA in Psychology from theUniversity of Notre Dame in 2005, she taughtmiddle school Science for two years in BatonRouge before coming to William and Mary.Rebecca enjoys cooking, tap dancing, andwinter weather.

KudosWe are always excited to share when any Center staff or student in thegifted education graduate programs receive the recognition theydeserve.

Dr. Joyce VanTassel-Baska, Executive Director of the Center, andPresident of the National Association for Gifted Children, was honoredby the Council for Exceptional Children - Talented and Gifted (CEC-TAG) organization at their annual conference for her role both in

11

advocating for the adoption of the newNCATE standards and for ensuring that thenew standards place strong emphasis ondiversity issues.

Dr. Carol Tieso, Assistant Professor in GiftedEducation, has received the 2007 NAGCEarly Leader award. She will be honored atNAGC’s 54th annual convention in Novemberfor her significant contributions to the field ofgifted education.

Kianga Thomas, doctoral candidate, receivedthe Outstanding Brother of the Year awardfrom the Xeta Lambda Chapter of Alpha PhiAlpha Fraternity for demonstratingscholarship, manly deeds, and love for allmankind.

The P.E.O. Board of Trustees selectedBronwyn MacFarlane, Center graduateassistant and doctoral candidate, to receivethe 2007-2008 P.E.O. Scholar Award. TheP.E.O. Scholars are selected nationally fromacross all career fields. Bronwyn is also thedoctoral student recipient of the 2007Excellence in Gifted Education Award at theCollege of William and Mary.

The master’s student award was received by Brig Lampert.

Senator Grassley of Iowa was honored by theCouncil for Exceptional Children for hisleadership on behalf of gifted and talentedchildren. CEC president Mary Ruth Colemanand then-NAGC president (Joyce) boththanked the Senator at a reception on CapitolHill in June.

Joyce with DianeMontgomery, President ofCEC-TAG and SusanJohnsen, President-Elect,CEC-TAG.

At the National Association for Gifted Children’s (NAGC) annual conference inNovember, the curriculum division will present an outstanding curriculum awardto the Center for the unit Building a New System: Colonial America 1607-1763.This will be the 13th unit developed by the Center to receive this award.

Unit DescriptionThis unit begins with an in-depth study of the interrelationships between theChesapeake Bay System and both the Native Americans and the early Englishcolonists in Virginia. The unit then turns to an exploration of the economic, social,and political systems of early America across the colonies, comparing andcontrasting lifestyles of different groups in different regions. Frameworks forreasoning and document analysis support students in their explorations of thisperiod of history.

This unit can be ordered by calling Kendall/Hunt Publishing at (800) 247-3458visit their website: www.kendallhunt.com.

Curriculum Award

UPCOMING EVENTS

FOCUSING ON THE FUTURE CAREER CONFERENCESaturday, January 19, 2008

SATURDAY ENRICHMENT PROGRAMFebruary 9 - March 22, 2008 (Saturdays)

NATIONAL CURRICULUM NETWORK CONFERENCEMarch 5 - 7, 2008

12

Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM)continue to be hot topics in education in general and in giftededucation in particular. American students are not performing as

well as their international counterparts on math and scienceassessments. Many leaders in the business industry have sounded analarm, foreseeing a shortage of adequately trained workers andinnovators in the STEM areas. The K-12 educational system plays avital role in addressing these issues, as it has the capacity to provideearly and enriched opportunities and experiences. As we become betterconsumers of educational research, we are better able to improve thoseopportunities and experiences for gifted learners. This annotatedbibliography is a gateway to some of that research. It represents a smallsample of some of the recent empirical research articles onmathematics and science in gifted education. These articles wereselected based on their recent publication and diversity in methodology,topic, and grade level.

MathHowley, A., Pendarivs, E., & Gholson, M. (2005). How talented students

in a rural school district experience school mathematics. Journalfor the Education of the Gifted, 29(2), 123-160.

This article presents a study of the mathematics experiences of 16identified gifted 7-14 year-olds living in a disadvantaged ruralAppalachian community. Through hour-long interviews, the researchersfound three themes that summarized participants’ mathematicsexperiences. These themes related to the substance and value ofmathematics, the nature and quality of mathematics instruction, andsupport from home. Although the participants overwhelminglyconsidered mathematics to be important, their mathematics experiencewas largely limited to computations and algorithms. Participantsdescribed slow, unchallenging, and repetitive mathematics instruction inthe regular classroom. All of the participants indicated receiving somemathematics support at home.

Kerr, B., & Robinson, S. E. (2004). Encouraging talented girls in mathand science: Effects of a guidance intervention. High AbilityStudies, 15, 85-102.

This intervention program targeted girls age 11 to 20 who had highgrades in math and science but seemed to be at-risk for failing toachieve their career goals. The goal of the program was to strengthencareer development through increased self-esteem and self-efficacy,mentorship, and guidance. More than 500 young women participated inthe program over a 7-year period. Girls who participated in the programshowed significant increases in the extent to which they sought career

information. Measures of self-esteem and self-efficacy showed mixed results, although significantincreases from the pre-test to the 3-to 4-monthfollow-up were found in four of the five measures.

Ma, X. (2005). A longitudinal assessment of early acceleration ofstudents in mathematics on growth in mathematics achievement.Developmental Review, 25, 104-131.

The Longitudinal Study of American Youth (2000), which focuses onmath and science education, was used to investigate the mathematicsachievement over time of students who had been mathematicallyaccelerated in junior high school. Mathematics achievement wascompared for gifted, honors, and regular accelerated and non-accelerated students. Results among gifted students suggested thatschools had virtually no impact on mathematics achievement foraccelerated and non-accelerated students. Additionally, the rate ofgrowth among accelerated gifted students was virtually the same as therate of growth among non-accelerated gifted students. For regularstudents however, acceleration significantly increased mathematicsachievement.

McKenna, M. A., Hollingsworth, P. L., & Barnes, L. L. B. (2005).Developing latent mathematics abilities in economicallydisadvantaged students. Roeper Review, 27, 222-227.

In this study, economically disadvantaged students were given theopportunity for sequential, yet individualized self-paced mathematicsacceleration through the use of Kumon mathematics materials as asupplement to traditional textbooks and instruction. Second and fourthgrade students who received Kumon instruction showed increasedgains in Kumon achievement in comparison to the non-Kumon controlgroup. Nationally normed standardized achievement tests wereadministered one and two years later to determine the residual effect ofKumon instruction. Students who had received Kumon instructionscored significantly higher than students in the non-Kumon controlgroup.

Nokelainen, P., Tirri, K., & Merenti-Välimäki, H. L. (2007). Investigatingthe influence of attribution styles on the development ofmathematical talent. Gifted Child Quarterly, 51, 64-81.

“Reasons people give for an outcome, such as success or failure in atask, are called attributions” (p. 66). Attributions and attribution stylesimpact motivation, expectations, and self-esteem. This study examinedand compared the attribution of effort and ability among Finnishadolescents and adults (N = 203) who were highly, moderately, or mildlymathematically gifted. The results suggest that there are differences inattribution styles based on the level of giftedness and gender, althoughdifferences between levels of giftedness appear to be more significant.Highly and moderately gifted participants were more likely to attributesuccess to ability, while mildly gifted participants were more likely toattribute success to effort. Highly gifted participants attributed failure tolack of ability.

Empirical Research on Mathematics and Science in GiftedEducation: An Annotated Bibliographyby Valija C. Rose

Continued on page 13, Annotated BibliographyS

13

Annotated Bibliography(Cont’d from page 13)

Reid, P. T., & Roberts, S. K. (2006). Gainingoptions: A mathematics program forpotentially talented at-risk adolescentgirls. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 52, 288-304.

This intervention program, collaborativelyestablished by two research universities,sought to increase participants’ mathematicsconfidence, skills, and interest through theintegration of mathematics and social scienceresearch. University student mentors workedwith small groups of participants as theyexplored data analysis, communication, andrepresentation, as outlined in Principles andStandards for School Mathematics (NationalCouncil of Teachers of Mathematics, 2000)for grades six through eight. The interventionprogram increased participants’ mathematicsconfidence and skills, but did not increasecareer or educational aspirations. Theauthors suggest that this was due to the highcareer and educational aspirationsparticipants possessed at the start of theprogram.

Reynolds, N. G., & Conway, B. J. (2003)Factors affecting mathematicallytalented females’ enrollment in highschool calculus. Journal of SecondaryGifted Education, 14, 218-228.

National Educational Longitudinal Study(NELS:88) and 1992 follow-up data wereutilized to identify and explore factorsassociated with taking high school calculusamong talented high school females. Eighthgrade girls enrolled in algebra and scoring inthe fourth quartile of standardized tests in1988 were included in this study. The authorinvestigated the impact of number of siblings,mother’s and father’s educational attainment,socioeconomic status, and educationalaspirations on calculus taking. Having nosiblings, a mother who had completed at leastsome college, and a base-year family incomegreater than $74,999 were each found to bestatistically significant predictors of calculus-taking.

Tsui, J. M., & Mazzocco, M. M. M. (2007).Effects of math anxiety andperfectionism on timed versus untimedmath testing in mathematically gifted

sixth graders. Roeper Review, 29, 132-139.

This study sought to examine the impact ofmath anxiety and perfectionism onmathematics performance on both timed anduntimed assessments. The authorshypothesized that students would performmore poorly on timed versus untimedassessments and that there would be apositive relationship between math anxietyand the discrepancy in performance. Theauthors also hypothesized that there wouldbe a negative relationship betweenperfectionism and performance discrepancy.Results suggested that the order in which thetwo tests were administered mattered.Students who received the untimed test firstdid not show a significant discrepancy inperformance. Students with low math anxietyand low perfectionism scores were morelikely to show discrepancies in timed versusuntimed performance.

ScienceCoates, D. (2006). ‘Science is not my thing’:

Primary teachers’ concerns aboutchallenging gifted pupils. Education 3-13, 34(1), 49-64.

This qualitative research study examinedteachers’ perceptions of factors that impededtheir ability to provide appropriatelychallenging science lessons to gifted learnersage 5-11. The author interviewed 13teachers, all working at the same primaryschool in Oxfordshire, England. Four primarythemes emerged from the study: teachers’subject knowledge and understanding,performing science investigations,organization of science teaching to allow forextension and differentiation, and boredom ofgifted and talented students. Lack ofconfidence in subject knowledge andunderstanding appeared to be the mostsalient factor impacting instruction, as itsignificantly affected teachers’ perceivedability to adequately address the remainingareas of concern.

Feist, G. J. (2006). The development ofscientific talent in Westinghouse finalistsand members of the National Academyof Sciences. Journal of Adult

Development, 13, 23-35.

Westinghouse finalists and members of theNational Academy of Science (NAS) arerecognized for outstanding scientific talentand work. This study examined the academicand career path of U.S. Westinghousefinalists, as well as early predictors ofachievement among NAS members. Eighty-three percent of the Westinghouse finalistssample completed the doctoral degree, withmany of those degrees earned at the nations’most selective institutions. The averageWestinghouse finalists were on average11.48 years old when they first knew theywanted to be scientists. The average age offirst publication for NAS was 23.57, withnearly 75% of the group having first publishedby the time they were 25 years old. Intrinsicenjoyment of science appeared to be amotivating factor for both groups.

Feng, A. X., Van-Tassel-Baska, J., Quek, C.,Bai, W., & O’Neill, B. (2005). Alongitudinal assessment of giftedstudents’ learning using the IntegratedCurriculum Model (ICM): Impacts andperceptions of the William and MaryLanguage Arts and Science Curriculum.Roeper Review, 27, 78-83.

This two-fold study assessed the effects of adifferentiated curriculum over time amongthird, fourth, and fifth grade students, andstakeholders’ perceptions of the effectivenessof that curriculum. Performance-basedassessments were utilized to assess studentlearning, while surveys were used to captureparents’, educators’, and students’perceptions of curriculum implementation andeffectiveness. Statistically significant andeducationally important student learninggrowth was realized at each grade level,irrespective of the length of exposure to thecurriculum (one, two, or three years). Themajority of both parents and teachers foundthe curriculum to be sufficiently challenging;however the majority of students found thecurriculum to be “challenging sometimes butnot always.”

Continued on page 14, AnnotatedBibliography

14

Hsu, L. (2003). Measuring the effectiveness of summer intensivephysics courses for gifted students: A pilot study and agenda forresearch. Gifted Child Quarterly, 47, 212-218.

Intensive summer courses for gifted students are often advertised asbeing equivalent to year-long courses, with some students earning highschool credit for successfully completing such a course. This studymeasured the effectiveness of eight summer intensive physics coursesby comparing each class’ gains to the gains published for high schooland college students enrolled in traditional, year-long physics courses.Students enrolled in the summer intensive physics courses gained asmuch as students enrolled in ordinary length physics courses. Whencompared to students enrolled in ordinary length honors physicscourses, gifted students enrolled in the intensive summer coursesgained more than those who were in traditional lecture-based courses,but not as much as those enrolled in “interactive engagement” courses.

Melber, L. M. (2003). Partnerships in science learning: Museumoutreach and elementary gifted education. Gifted Child Quarterly,47, 251-258.

This study investigated the impact of a museum science program on thecontent knowledge, career attitudes, and understanding of scientificwork among academically gifted elementary school students. Thirty-onefourth and fifth grade students participated in a month long after schoolprogram that incorporated inquiry-based activities, many of whichsimulated the processes museum scientists practice. In terms ofcontent knowledge, participants reported on average having learned “agood amount” about marine biology, insects/arthropods,archaeology/Native Americans, and dinosaurs/paleontology. Studentsshowed increased interest in becoming scientists, even with highexisting interest in scientific study, and an increase in theirunderstanding of the varied work scientists do.

Park, S. K., Park, K. H., & Choe, H. S. (2005). The relationship betweenthinking styles and scientific giftedness in Korea. Journal ofSecondary Gifted Education, 16, 87-97.

More than 350 gifted and nongifted Korean high school studentsparticipated in this study to determine the relationship between thinkingstyles, as outlined in Sternberg’s theory of mental self-government, andscientific giftedness. Mental self-government theory suggests that themanner in which people “govern and manage their everyday activities”is analogous to various dimensions of government. These ways ofgoverning are called thinking styles. Although individuals may havepreferences for a particular style, their use is situation dependent. In thisstudy, the researcher found that gifted Korean science students weremore likely to have a preference for “creativity-generating and more

complex” thinking styles that involve comparing,evaluating, and other higher-order skills, than theirnongifted counterparts.

Richards, M. R. E., & Omdal, S. N. (2007). Effects of tiered instructionon academic performance in a secondary science course. Journalof Advanced Academics, 18, 424-453.

Tiering has long been recommended as an appropriate instructionalstrategy for gifted learners in heterogeneously grouped classrooms.Using a sample of 293 freshmen enrolled in general science classes atone high school, this study sought to measure the effects of tieredinstruction on academic performance. Seven classes serving as thecontrol group received middle level instruction, while another sevenclasses received tiered instruction commensurate with their level ofbackground knowledge. Tiering proved to be most successful forstudents in the lower background knowledge group. Not only were theirposttest scores significantly higher than the lower backgroundknowledge learners in the control group, their scores were nearly equalto those in both the control group and the midrange backgroundknowledge treatment group.

Ziegler, A., Finsterwald, M., & Grassinger, R. (2005). Predictors of learnedhelplessness among average and mildly gifted girls and boysattending initial high school physics instruction in Germany. GiftedChild Quarterly, 49, 7-18.

Learned helplessness describes a behavior that develops whenadverse outcomes negatively impact a person’s perception of theirability to attain positive outcomes, regardless of their own actions. Thisstudy investigates the explanations and predictors of learnedhelplessness, as well as its relationship to gender and talent level.Participants were 392 German high school students enrolled in theirfirst physics course. The researchers found that helplessness increasedin both boys and girls over time, although girls were more likely toexperience a sense of helplessness. Higher levels of giftedness showedlower levels of helplessness which suggests that giftedness may serveas a protective factor against helplessness.

Annotated Bibliography(Cont’d from page 13)

S

Michael, how did you decide to write curriculum for giftedstudents?

I was hired to teach English at a junior high school, but no onetold me that three of my classes were identified gifted. Two days beforeschool started, a colleague asked me what I was going to do in mygifted classes. I said, "My what?" I didn't even know what she meant. Ibegan a struggle to understand the needs, to get certified, and todevelop lesson plans that would be right for those students. Eventually,a professor, Dr. Julie Long, told me to get my lesson plans published-something that would never have occurred to me.

How does your knowledge of creativity theory affect yourwritings?

I studied creativity theory as part of my Masters program ingifted education, and it immediately had a strong effect on my teaching.It changed the way I developed questions. It led me into a far moreopen-ended approach to content. It helped me explain the thinkingstage of research papers to students. I was especially drawn to theWallas model: preparation, incubation, illumination, and verification.The model is simple but valid, and helps explain many crucial things; itis especially important for students to learn about the need forincubation. Dr. Zoa Rockenstein once said to me that incubation feelslike failure; it does, and realizing that this difficult stage is normal, that itis good, that great ideas don't just pop out on demand, that you mustgive yourself time to read and think and read more...this is so important.I also taught my students the rules of brainstorming, and had thempractice it.

You are very interested in the poetics of literature, and this themeis evident in many of your books, particularly the series aboutThomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln, and Martin Luther King Jr.How did you become interested in writing these books?

I wanted a way to put language arts to the test and therebyprove to students that language arts is the core of all content, that if theyare great at language arts, they will be better at everything else too. Ikept thinking about how there were three documents that share thesame sentence: “All men are created equal.” I decided to applylanguage arts in an interdisciplinary way, analyze those documents withgrammar, poetics, writing elements, vocabulary, and see if such ananalysis would be worthwhile. It proved to be powerful beyond mywildest expectations. The language of the Gettysburg Address isamazing, a ten-sentence university education. Lincoln was an alphagenius.

What inspired you to write The Word Within the Word?It was like an epiphany. I was reading a research study, and it

said that if you knew the 100 most common Latin and Greek stems inEnglish, that as a result you would have a knowledge of 5,000 words.The more I thought about it, the more sense it made. I wanted to usethat idea to develop a vocabulary program to teach the high end ofscholarly English vocabulary, but I wanted to build a program that wasnot just memorization, one that applied all of the great thinking skills tothe great content. I only viewed it as lesson plans; it was Julie Long who

told me it was a book. It was her active mentorship that opened theworld of writing to me.

You often describe Abraham Lincoln as a poet. How does he bringpoetry into his political speeches?

Abraham Lincoln was a poet, ballad stanzas mostly, longbefore he was a president, and when he wrote the Gettysburg Address,he used classical techniques of poetry to lift his speech to the highestpower. In the Address he used iambic meter, hidden rhyme, assonance,and other techniques to make those ten sentences communicate.

Your work, Classic Words, has been well received. How did youcome up with the idea for this project? How long did it take tobring this project to fruition?

Classic Words is my research database of the rigorousvocabulary that appears in the classics of British and Americanliterature. For years I kept wondering if there really were certain wordsthat students had to know. I bought a computer and a databaselanguage and learned to write the language, and began analyzing therigorous vocabulary of the classics. I would enter the word, its sentence,the author, title, and so forth, for every big word on every page of, forexample, Frankenstein. More than a decade later, I have 35,000 entriesfrom over 140 books, and I have found that there are indeed words thatare required knowledge, such as countenance, visage, manifest,odious, serene, grotesque, and so forth.

How did you decide to write Classics in the Classroom?I always had my high school students read two classics per

term outside of class, in addition to any titles that we were readingtogether. The students had to have a talk with me about each book theyread. They were always asking me for title suggestions. Eventually, Itried to put together a list of 100 great titles for them. After lots ofthought, I printed out a list of 100 titles, in large font, and put it on theclassroom wall. Then they wanted more titles, and they wantedinformation about the books. In time, a document for students evolvedinto a book. Almost everything I have written arose from the classroomcontext, the experienced need of the students. I don't think I could havebecome a textbook writer if I had not first been a classroom teacher forseveral decades; there are too many things that only teachers know.

What projects are you currently working on?I'm writing a series of six practice books that go with my other

books but that give teachers more assignments to use. Each book is100 pages long; each page has a sentence, with the grammar analyzedat four levels (parts of speech, parts of sentence, phrases, andclauses), and in each sentence there is a vocabulary word (or more)from the corresponding vocabulary book. Poetics and writingtechniques are also featured in each example. I'm also writing a seriesof books about writing; I finished one on the sentence and one on theparagraph, and I'm working on the next one about the essay.

15

Creativity in the Classroom: An Interview with Michael ClayThompsonby Dr. Sue Henshon

Continued on page 16, Annotated Bibliography

Join us at the National Curriculum Network Conference March 5-7, 2008

to celebrate the Center for Gifted Education’s 20th Anniversary.

Keynote Speakers Joyce VanTassel-Baska, The College of William and Mary

& Karen Rogers, University of St. Thomas, Minnesota

Additional CommentsI think that we, as teachers of gifted children, are especially fortunate towork in a field that is rich in powerful theory and research. My exposureto the great texts in the field and to hundreds of research articlescompletely transformed my classroom practice. As I wrote dozens ofpapers in my graduate gifted program, I found myself, in a sense, faceto face with the great thinkers in the field, such as James Gallagher andJoyce VanTassel-Baska, Paul Torrance and Barbara Clark. After myclose encounter-through their books and articles-I was never the sameagain. I did not teach the same way, did not lecture the same way, didnot give the same assignments, did not create test essay questions thesame way. Everything was lifted to a higher level. Eventually, I actuallygot to know some of the figures who influenced me most, and Idiscovered that our field permits that; you can find yourself in aconversation with someone whose knowledge is immense, world-class,and it magnifies your professional life. I would encourage every youngteacher to join the National Association for Gifted Children (NAGC), tofocus on the quality of curriculum, to read extensively in the field, tobegin presenting at conferences and to participate in this challenge ofmeeting these serious needs that gifted children have.

Bibliography

Thompson, M. C. (1998). Classic words. Unionville, NY: RoyalFireworks Press.

Thompson, M. C. (2003). Grammar voyage. Unionville, NY: RoyalFireworks Press.

Thompson, M. C. (2003). Lincoln's ten sentences. Unionville, NY: RoyalFireworks Press.

Thompson, M. C. (2004). Music of the hemispheres. Unionville, NY:Royal Fireworks Press.

Thompson, M. C. (2000). Word within the word I. Unionville, NY: RoyalFireworks Press.

****************************************************************************************************************************************************************

Michael Thompson, who, through his teaching, his books andpresentations, has inspired thousands of students and educators with anew love of language and literature, was a classroom teacher, middleschool head and academic, over a period of thirty years. He is now afull-time author and consultant, and an acclaimed speaker andworkshop presenter.

He serves on the Board of Directors of the NationalAssociation for Gifted Children and is an instructor in the internetLearning Links program for Northwestern University. He has been afaculty member of the Wake Forest University Summer Institute forGifted Education, also the University of North Carolina/CharlotteSummer institute for Gifted Education and The Cullowhee Experience.He has served on the Board of Directors for the North CarolinaAssociation of Gifted & Talented and on the regional Board of Advisorsto the North Carolina/South Carolina Future Problem Solving Program.He has been consultant to the Center for Gifted Education at theCollege of William and Mary, consultant and Lead Scholar for theNational Javits Project for Language Arts, and President of the IndianaGifted Association. Michael Thompson's materials may be purchasedthrough Royal Fireworks press. (http://www.rfwp.com/mctbiog.php)

Creativity in the Classroom(cont’d from page 15)