1932

Abstract

Gifted students are individuals who are recognized for performance that is superior to that of their peers. Although giftedness is typically associated with schooling, gifted individuals exist across academic and nonacademic domains. In this review, we begin by acknowledging some of the larger debates in the field of gifted education and provide brief summaries of major conceptual frameworks applied to gifted education, dividing them into three categories: frameworks focused on ability, frameworks focused on talent development, and integrative frameworks. We then discuss common practices used to identify gifted students, giving specific attention to the identification of those in underrepresented groups, followed by brief overviews of the numbers of students who are classified as gifted, programming options for gifted students, and social and emotional issues associated with being gifted. We conclude with a discussion of several unresolved issues in the field.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-psych-010418-102846
2019-01-04
2024-04-22
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/psych/70/1/annurev-psych-010418-102846.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-psych-010418-102846&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Literature Cited

  1. Allensworth EM, Gwynne JA, Moore P, de la Torre M 2014. Looking forward to high school and college: middle grade indicators of readiness in Chicago public schools Rep., Consort. Chicago School Res., Univ. Chicago: https://consortium.uchicago.edu/sites/default/files/publications/Middle%20Grades%20Report.pdf
  2. Almarode JT, Subotnik RF, Crowe E, Tai RH, Lee GSM, Nowlin F 2014. Specialized high schools and Talent Search programs: incubators for adolescents with high ability in STEM disciplines. J. Adv. Acad. 25:307–31
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Assouline SG, Colangelo N, VanTassel-Baska J, Lupkowski-Shoplik A 2015. A Nation Empowered: Evidence Trumps the Excuses Holding Back America's Brightest Students Iowa City, IA: Accel. Inst.
  4. Aud S, Fox M, KewalRamani A 2010. Status and trends in the education of racial and ethnic groups Rep. 2010–015 Natl. Cent. Educ. Stat., US Dep. Educ. Washington, DC:
  5. Bain SK, Choate SM, Bliss SL 2006. Perceptions of developmental, social, and emotional issues in giftedness: Are they realistic. Roeper Rev 29:41–48
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Bloom BS 1985. Developing Talent in Young People New York, NY: Ballantine
  7. Borland JH 2005. Gifted education without gifted children: the case for no conception of giftedness. In Sternberg & Davidson 2005 1–19
  8. Card D, Giuliano L 2015. Can universal screening increase the representation of low income and minority students in gifted education? NBER Work. Pap. 21519
  9. Carter PL, Welner KG 2013. Closing the Opportunity Gap: What America Must Do to Give Every Child an Even Chance Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
  10. Chart H, Grigorenko EL, Sternberg RJ 2008. Identification: the Aurora Battery. Critical Issues and Practices in Gifted Education JA Plucker, CM Callahan 345–65 Waco, TX: Prufrock Press
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Chung EY 2017. School counselling for the gifted: responding to the social-emotional needs of gifted students. School Counselling in a Chinese Context: Supporting Students in Need in Hong Kong M Hue 94–105 Abingdon, UK: Routledge
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Coleman LJ, Cross TL 2005. Being Gifted in School: An Introduction to Development, Guidance, and Teaching Waco, TX: Prufrock Press
  13. Coll. Board. 2014. The 10th Annual AP Report to the Nation New York: Coll. Board
  14. Cross TL, Cassady JC, Miller KA 2006. Suicidal ideation and psychological type in gifted adolescents. Gifted Child Q 19:46–48
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Cross TL, Cross JR 2018. Suicide among students with gifts and talents. In Pfeiffer et al. 2018 601–14
  16. Dai DY 2010. The Nature and Nurture of Giftedness: A New Framework for Understanding Gifted Education New York: Teach. Coll. Press
  17. Dai DY 2018. A history of giftedness: a century of quest for identity. In Pfeiffer et al. 2018 3–23
  18. Dai DY, Chen F 2014. Paradigms of Gifted Education: A Guide to Theory-Based, Practice-Focused Research Waco, TX: Prufrock Press
  19. Dixson DD, Roberson CCB, Worrell FC 2017. Psychosocial keys to African American achievement? Examining the relationship between achievement and psychosocial variables in high achieving African Americans. J. Adv. Acad. 28:120–40
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Dixson DD, Worrell FC, Olszewski-Kubilius P, Subotnik RF 2016. Beyond perceived ability: the contribution of psychosocial factors to academic performance. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 1377:67–77
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Ericsson KA, Krampe RT, Tesch-Römer C 1993. The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance. Psychol. Rev. 100:363–406
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Ericsson KA, Nandagopal K, Roring RW 2005. Giftedness viewed from the expert-performance perspective. J. Educ. Gifted 28:287–311
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Ericsson KA, Pool R 2016. Peak: How to Master Almost Anything Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin
  24. Erwin JO 2015. Prevalence and impact of peer victimization among gifted children PhD Diss Univ. Calif. Berkeley:
  25. Erwin JO, Worrell FC 2012. Assessment practices and the underrepresentation of minority students in gifted and talented education. J. Psychoeduc. Assess. 30:74–87
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Ford DY 1998. The underrepresentation of minority students in gifted education: problems and promises in recruitment and retention. J. Spec. Educ. 32:4–14
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Ford DY, Helms JE 2012. Overview and introduction: testing and assessing African Americans: “unbiased” tests are still unfair. J. Negro Educ. 81:186–89
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Gagné F 2005. From gifts to talents: the DMGT as a developmental model. In Sternberg & Davidson 2005 98–119
  29. Gagné F 2018. Academic talent development: theory and best practices. In Pfeiffer et al. 2018 163–83
  30. Galton F 1869. Hereditary Genius: An Inquiry Into its Laws and Consequences Basingstoke, UK: Macmillan
  31. Gardner H 1983. Frames of Mind New York: Basic Books
  32. Gardner H 1999. Intelligence Reframed: Multiple Intelligences for the 21st Century New York: Basic Books
  33. Gertz M 2017. NFL Census 2016. ProFootballLogic April 19. http://www.profootballlogic.com/articles/nfl-census-2016/
  34. Giancola J, Kahlenberg RD 2016. True merit: ensuring our brightest students have access to our best colleges and universities Rep. Jack Kent Cooke Found. Landsdowne, VA: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED569948
  35. Gollan J 2011. Gifted programs go on block as schools must do with less. The New York Times Feb. 19. https://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/20/us/20bcgifted.html
  36. Hambrick DZ, Campitelli G, Macnamara BN 2018. The Science of Expertise: Behavioral, Neural, and Genetic Approaches to Complex Skill Abingdon, UK: Routledge
  37. Hambrick DZ, Oswald FL, Altmann EM, Meinz EJ, Gobet F, Campitelli G 2014. Deliberate practice: Is that all it takes to become an expert. Intelligence 45:34–45
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Hambrick DZ, Tucker-Drob EM 2015. The genetics of music accomplishment: evidence for gene-environment correlation and interaction. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 22:112–20
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Hoge RD, Renzulli JS 1993. Exploring the link between giftedness and self-concept. Rev. Educ. Res. 63:449–65
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Horn CV 2015. Young scholars: a talent development model for finding and nurturing potential in under-served populations. Gifted Child Today 38:19–31
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Hoxby CM, Avery C 2013. The missing “one-offs”: the hidden supply of high-achieving, low-income students. Brookings Pap. Econ. Act. Spring:1–65
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Johnsen SJ 2011. Identifying Gifted Students: A Practical Guide Waco, TX: Prufrock Press, 2nd ed..
  43. Kanevsky L 2013. The Tool Kit for High End Curriculum Differentiation Burnaby, Can.: Simon Fraser Univ.
  44. Kell HJ, Lubinski D, Benbow CP, Steiger JH 2013. Creativity and technical innovation: spatial ability's unique role. Psychol. Sci. 24:1831–36
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Lapchick R, Guiao A 2015. The 2015 Racial and Gender Report Card: National Basketball Association Orlando, FL: Inst. Divers. Ethics Sport
  46. Lapchick R, Salas D 2015. The 2015 Racial and Gender Report Card: Major League Baseball Orlando, FL: Inst. Divers. Ethics Sport
  47. Lidz CS, Elliott JG 2006. Use of dynamic assessment with gifted students. Gifted Educ. Int. 21:151–61
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Lohman DF 2005.a An aptitude perspective on talent: implications for identification of academically gifted minority students. J. Educ. Gifted 28:333–60
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Lohman DF 2005.b Review of Naglieri and Ford 2003: Does the Naglieri Nonverbal Ability Test identify equal proportions of high scoring White, Black and Hispanic students. Gifted Child Q 49:19–28
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Lohman DF, Korb KA, Lakin JM 2008. Identifying academically gifted English-language learners using nonverbal tests: a comparison of the Raven, NNAT, and CogAT. Gifted Child Q 52:275–96
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Loveless T 2014. Tracking in middle school: a surprising ally in pursuit of equity? Paper presented at the Thomas B. Fordham Institute's Education for Upward Mobility Conference Washington, DC:
  52. Lubinski D 2010. Spatial ability and STEM: A sleeping giant for talent identification and development. Personal. Individ. Differ. 49:344–51
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Lubinski D 2016. From Terman to today: a century of findings on intellectual precocity. Rev. Educ. Res. 86:900–44
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Lubinski D, Benbow CP, Kell HJ 2014. Life paths and accomplishments of mathematically precocious males and females four decades later. Psychol. Sci. 25:2217–32
    [Google Scholar]
  55. Makel MC, Kell HJ, Lubinski D, Putallaz M, Benbow CP 2016. When lightning strikes twice: profoundly gifted, profoundly accomplished. Psychol. Sci. 27:1004–18
    [Google Scholar]
  56. McBee M 2010. Examining the probability of identification for gifted programs for students in Georgia elementary schools: a multilevel path analysis. Gifted Child Q 54:283–97
    [Google Scholar]
  57. McBee MT, McCoach DB, Peters SJ, Matthews MS 2012.a The case for a schism: a commentary on Subotnik, Olszewski-Kubilius, and Worrell 2011. Gifted Child Q 56:210–14
    [Google Scholar]
  58. McBee MT, Peters SJ, Miller EM 2016. The impact of the nomination stage on gifted program identification: a comprehensive psychometric analysis. Gifted Child Q 60:258–78
    [Google Scholar]
  59. McBee MT, Peters SJ, Waterman C 2014. Combining scores in multiple-criteria assessment systems: the impact of combination rule. Gifted Child Q 58:69–89
    [Google Scholar]
  60. McBee MT, Shaunessy E, Matthews MS 2012.b An analysis of district-level efforts to increase the identification of underrepresented learners. J. Adv. Acad. 23:326–44
    [Google Scholar]
  61. McFarland J, Hussar B, de Brey C, Snyder T, Wang X et al. 2017. The condition of education 2017 Rep. 2017–144 Natl. Cent. Educ. Stat., US Dep. Educ. Washington, DC: https://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2017144
  62. Morgan PL, Farkas G, Hillemeier MM, Maczua S 2016. Science achievement gaps begin very early, persist, and are largely explained by modifiable factors. Educ. Res. 45:18–35
    [Google Scholar]
  63. Naglieri JA 1997.a Naglieri Nonverbal Ability Test San Antonio, TX: Psychol. Corp.
  64. Naglieri JA 1997.b NNAT Multilevel Technical Manual San Antonio, TX: Psychol. Corp.
  65. Naglieri JA, Ford DY 2003. Addressing underrepresentation of gifted minority students using the Naglieri Nonverbal Ability Test (NNAT). Gifted Child Q 47:155–60
    [Google Scholar]
  66. Natl. Assoc. Gifted Child., Counc. State Dir. Programs Gifted. 2015. 20142015 State of the States in Gifted Education: Policy and Practice Data Washington, DC: Natl. Assoc. Gifted Child.
    [Google Scholar]
  67. Natl. Coll. Athl. Assoc. 2017. Estimated probability of competing in college athletics Rep. Natl. Coll. Athl. Assoc. Indianapolis, IN: http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/research/estimated-probability-competing-college-athletics
  68. Neihart M, Pfeiffer SI, Cross TL 2016. The Social and Emotional Development of Gifted Children: What Do We Know? Waco, TX: Prufrock Press. 2nd ed.
  69. Neisser U, Boodoo G, Bouchard TJ Jr., Boykin AW, Brody N et al. 1996. Intelligence: knowns and unknowns. Am. Psychol. 51:77–101
    [Google Scholar]
  70. Nisbett RE, Aronson J, Blair C, Dickens W, Flynn J et al. 2012. Intelligence: new findings and theoretical developments. Am. Psychol. 67:130–59
    [Google Scholar]
  71. Noice T, Noice H 2019. The development of acting talent: possibilities and approaches. The Psychology of High Performance: Developing Human Potential Into Domain-Specific Talent RF Subotnik, P Olszewski-Kubilius, FC Worrell Washington, DC: Am. Psychol. Assoc In press
    [Google Scholar]
  72. Off. Civil Rights. 2012. The transformed Civil Rights Data Collection (CRDC) Rep., Off. Civil Rights, US Dep. Educ. Washington, DC: https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/crdc-2012-data-summary.pdf
  73. Olszewski-Kubilius P 2015. Talent searches and accelerated programming for gifted students. A Nation Empowered: How Schools Hold Back America's Brightest Students 2 S Assouline, J Colangelo, N VanTassel-Baska, A Lupkowski-Shoplik 111–22 Iowa City, IA: Univ. Iowa
    [Google Scholar]
  74. Olszewski-Kubilius P, Clarenbach J 2014. Closing the opportunity gap: program factors contributing to academic success in culturally different youth. Gifted Child Today 37:103–10
    [Google Scholar]
  75. Olszewski-Kubilius P, Steenbergen-Hu S 2017. Blending research-based practices and practice-embedded research: Project Excite closes achievement and excellence gaps for underrepresented gifted minority students. Gifted Child Q 61:202–9
    [Google Scholar]
  76. Olszewski-Kubilius P, Steenbergen-Hu S, Thomson D, Rosen R 2017. Minority achievement gaps in STEM: findings of a longitudinal study of Project Excite. Gifted Child Q 61:20–39
    [Google Scholar]
  77. Peters SJ, Engerrand KG 2016. Equity and excellence: proactive efforts in the identification of underrepresented students for gifted and talented services. Gifted Child Q 60:159–71
    [Google Scholar]
  78. Peters SJ, Gentry M 2012. Group-specific norms and teacher rating scales: implications for underrepresentation. J. Adv. Acad. 23:125–44
    [Google Scholar]
  79. Peters SJ, Matthews MS, McBee MT, McCoach DB 2014. Beyond Gifted Education: Designing and Implementing Advanced Academic Programs Waco, TX: Prufrock Press
  80. Peters SJ, Pereira N 2017. A replication of the internal validity structure of three major teaching rating scales. J. Adv. Acad. 28:101–19
    [Google Scholar]
  81. Pfeiffer SI, Shaunessy-Dedrick E, Foley-Nicpon M 2018. APA Handbook of Giftedness and Talent Washington, DC: Am. Psychol. Assoc.
  82. Phillipson SN, Stoeger H, Ziegler A 2013. Exceptionality in East Asia: Explorations in the Actiotope Model of Giftedness Abingdon, UK: Routledge
  83. Piechowski MM 1986. The concept of developmental potential. Roeper Rev 8:190–97
    [Google Scholar]
  84. Piirto J 1998. Understanding Those Who Create Scottsdale, AZ: Great Potential Press, 2nd ed..
  85. Plucker JA, Peters SJ 2016. Excellence Gaps in Education: Expanding Opportunities for Talented Students Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press
  86. Reardon SF 2011. The widening academic achievement gap between the rich and the poor: new evidence and possible explanations. Whither Opportunity? Rising Inequality, School and Children's Life Chances GJ Duncan, RJ Murnane 91–116 New York: Russell Sage Found.
    [Google Scholar]
  87. Renzulli JS 1977. The Enrichment Triad Model: A Guide for Developing Defensible Programs for the Gifted and Talented Mansfield Center, CT: Creat. Learn. Press
  88. Renzulli JS 1978. What makes giftedness? Reexamining a definition. Phi Delta Kappan 60:180–84261
    [Google Scholar]
  89. Renzulli JS 2016. The enrichment triad model: a guide for developing defensible programs for the gifted and talented. Reflections on Gifted Education: Critical Works by Joseph S. Renzulli and Colleagues SM Reis 193–210 Waco, TX: Prufrock Press
    [Google Scholar]
  90. Renzulli JS, Reis SM 1994. Research related to the schoolwide enrichment model. Gifted Child Q 38:7–20
    [Google Scholar]
  91. Renzulli JS, Reis SM 1997. The Schoolwide Enrichment Model: A How-To Guide for Educational Excellence Mansfield Center, CT: Creat. Learn. Press, 2nd ed..
  92. Rindermann HR, Thompson J 2011. Cognitive capitalism: the effect of cognitive ability on wealth, as mediated through scientific achievement and economic freedom. Psychol. Sci. 22:754–63
    [Google Scholar]
  93. Rinn AN 2007. Effects of programmatic selectivity on the academic achievement, academic self-concepts, and aspirations of gifted college students. Gifted Child Q 51:232–45
    [Google Scholar]
  94. Rinn AN 2018. Social and emotional considerations for gifted students. In Pfeiffer et al. 2018 453–64
  95. Rinn AN, Bishop J 2015. Gifted adults: a systematic review and analysis of the literature. Gifted Child Q 59:213–35
    [Google Scholar]
  96. Silverman LK 2002. Asynchronous development. The Social and Emotional Development of Gifted Children: What Do We Know? M Neihart, SM Reis, NM Robinson, SM Moon 31–37 Waco, TX: Prufrock Press
    [Google Scholar]
  97. Simonton DK 2005. Giftedness and genetics: the emergenic-epigenetic model and its implications. J. Educ. Gifted 28:270–86
    [Google Scholar]
  98. Simonton DK, Song AV 2009. Eminence, IQ, physical and mental health, and achievement domain: Cox's 282 geniuses revisited. Psychol. Sci. 20:429–34
    [Google Scholar]
  99. Snellman K, Silva J, Frederick CB, Putnam RD 2015. The engagement gap: social mobility and extracurricular participation among American youth. Ann. Am. Acad. Political Soc. Sci. 657:194–207
    [Google Scholar]
  100. Snyder TD, de Brey C, Dillow SA 2016. Digest of education statistics 2015 Rep. 2017–094 Natl. Cent. Educ. Stat., US Dep. Educ. Washington, DC:
  101. Snyder TD, de Brey C, Dillow SA 2018. Digest of education statistics 2016 Rep. 2017–094 Natl. Cent. Educ. Stat., US Dep. Educ. Washington, DC:
  102. Sosniak L 1999. An everyday curriculum for the development of talent. J. Second. Gifted Educ. 10:166–72
    [Google Scholar]
  103. Speirs Neumeister KL, Adams CM, Pierce RL, Cassady JC, Dixon FA 2007. Teachers’ perceptions of giftedness: implications for identifying and serving diverse gifted students. J. Educ. Gifted 30:479–99
    [Google Scholar]
  104. Stanley JC 1976. The case for extreme educational acceleration of intellectually brilliant youths. Gifted Child Q 20:66–75
    [Google Scholar]
  105. Stanley JC 1985. Finding intellectually talented youths and helping them educationally. J. Spec. Educ. 19:363–72
    [Google Scholar]
  106. Steenbergen-Hu S, Makel MC, Olszewski-Kubilius P 2016. What one hundred years of research says about the effects of ability grouping and acceleration on K-12 students’ academic achievement: findings of two second-order meta-analyses. Rev. Educ. Res. 86:849–99
    [Google Scholar]
  107. Sternberg RJ 1986. A triarchic theory of intellectual giftedness. In Sternberg & Davidson 1986 223–43
  108. Sternberg RJ 2001. Giftedness as developing expertise: a theory of the interface between high abilities and achieved knowledge. High Abil. Stud. 12:159–79
    [Google Scholar]
  109. Sternberg RJ 2017. ACCEL: a new model for identifying the gifted. Roeper Rev 39:152–69
    [Google Scholar]
  110. Sternberg RJ, Castejon JL, Prieto MD, Hautamäki J, Grigorenko EL 2001. Confirmatory factor analysis of the Sternberg Triarchic Abilities Test in three international samples: an empirical test of the triarchic theory of intelligence. Eur. J. Psychol. Assess. 17:1–16
    [Google Scholar]
  111. Sternberg RJ, Clinkenbeard P 1995. The triarchic model applied to identifying, teaching, and assessing gifted children. Roeper Rev 17:255–60
    [Google Scholar]
  112. Sternberg RJ, Davidson JE 1986. Conceptions of Giftedness Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  113. Sternberg RJ, Davidson JE 2005. Conceptions of Giftedness Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2nd ed..
  114. Sternberg RJ, Ferrari M, Clinkenbeard P, Grigorenko EL 1996. Identification, instruction and assessment of gifted children: a construct validation of a triarchic model. Gifted Child Q 40:129–37
    [Google Scholar]
  115. Subotnik RF, Jarvin L 2005. Beyond expertise: conceptions of giftedness as great performance. In Sternberg & Davidson 2005 343–57
  116. Subotnik RF, Kassan L, Summers E, Wasser A 1993. Genius Revisited: High IQ Children Grown Up Norwood, NJ: Ablex
  117. Subotnik RF, Olszewski-Kubilius P, Worrell FC 2011. Rethinking giftedness and gifted education: a proposed direction forward based on psychological science. Psychol. Sci. Public Interest 12:3–54
    [Google Scholar]
  118. Subotnik RF, Olszewski-Kubilius P, Worrell FC 2019. The Psychology of High Performance: Developing Human Potential Into Domain-Specific Talent Washington, DC: Am. Psychol. Assoc In press
  119. Subotnik RF, Olszewski-Kubilius P, Worrell FC 2018. Talent development as the most promising focus of giftedness and gifted education. In Pfeiffer et al. 2018 231–45
  120. Subotnik RF, Pillmeier E, Jarvin L 2009. The psychosocial dimensions of creativity in mathematics: implications for gifted education policy. Creativity in Mathematics and the Education of Gifted Students R Leikin, A Berman, B Koichu 165–79 Rotterdam, Neth.: Sense Publ.
    [Google Scholar]
  121. Suldo SM, Hearon BV, Shaunessy-Dedrick S 2018. Examining gifted students’ mental health through the lens of positive psychology. In Pfeiffer et al. 2018 433–49
  122. Tannenbaum AJ 1986. Giftedness: a psychosocial approach. In Sternberg & Davidson 1986 21–52
  123. Terman LM 1922. A new approach to the study of genius. Psychol. Rev. 29:310–18
    [Google Scholar]
  124. Terman LM 1925. Genetic Studies of Genius, Vol. 1: Mental and Physical Traits of a Thousand Gifted Children Stanford, CA: Stanford Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  125. Terman LM, Oden MH 1959. Genetic Studies of Genius, Vol. 5: The Gifted Group at Mid-Life: 35 Years’ Follow Up of the Superior Child Stanford, CA: Stanford Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  126. Ullén F, Hambrick DZ, Mosing MA 2016. Rethinking expertise: a multi-factorial gene-environment interaction model of expert performance. Psychol. Bull. 142:427–46
    [Google Scholar]
  127. VanTassel-Baska J, Feng AX, Evans BL 2007. Patterns of identification and performance among gifted students identified through performance tasks: a three-year analysis. Gifted Child Q 51:218–31
    [Google Scholar]
  128. VanTassel-Baska J, Johnson D, Avery LD 2002. Using performance tasks in the identification of economically disadvantaged and minority gifted learners: findings from Project STAR. Gifted Child Q 46:110–23
    [Google Scholar]
  129. Wai J 2014. Investigating the world's rich and powerful: education, cognitive ability, and sex differences. Intelligence 46:54–72
    [Google Scholar]
  130. Wai J, Lubinski D, Benbow CP, Steiger JH 2010. Accomplishment in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) and its relation to STEM educational dose: a 25-year longitudinal study. J. Educ. Psychol. 102:860–71
    [Google Scholar]
  131. Wai J, Worrell FC 2016. Helping disadvantaged and spatially talented students fulfill their potential: related and neglected national resources. Policy Insights Behav. Brain Sci. 3:122–28
    [Google Scholar]
  132. Wai J, Worrell FC 2017. Fully developing the potential of academically advanced students: Helping them will help society Rep., Am. Enterp. Inst. Washington, DC: https://www.aei.org/publication/fully-developing-the-potential-of-academically-advanced-students-helping-them-will-help-society/
  133. Warne RT, Anderson B, Johnson AO 2013. The impact of race and ethnicity on the identification process for giftedness in Utah. J. Educ. Gifted 36:487–508
    [Google Scholar]
  134. Worrell FC 2018. Identifying gifted learners: utilizing nonverbal assessment. Fundamentals of Gifted Education: Considering Multiple Perspectives CM Callahan, Hertberg-Davis 125–34 Abingdon, UK: Routledge, 2nd ed..
    [Google Scholar]
  135. Worrell FC, Dixson DD 2018. Retaining and recruiting underrepresented gifted students. Handbook of Giftedness in Children SI Pfeiffer, pp. 209–26. Berlin: Springer. 2nd ed.
    [Google Scholar]
  136. Worrell FC, Erwin JO 2011. Best practices in identifying students for gifted and talented education programs. J. Appl. School Psychol. 27:319–40
    [Google Scholar]
  137. Worrell FC, Olszewski-Kubilius P, Subotnik RF 2012. Important issues, some rhetoric, and a few straw men: a response to comments on “Rethinking Giftedness and Gifted Education.”. Gifted Child Q 56:224–31
    [Google Scholar]
  138. Worrell FC, Subotnik RF, Olszewski-Kubilius P 2018. Talent development: a path towards eminence. In Pfeiffer et al. 2018 247–58
  139. Wyner JS, Bridgeland JM, DiIulio JJ Jr. 2007. Achievement trap: how America is failing millions of high-achieving students from lower-income families Rep., Jack Kent Cooke Found. Landsdowne, VA:
  140. Ziegler A 2005. The actiotope model of giftedness. In Sternberg & Davidson 2005 411–36
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-psych-010418-102846
Loading
  • Article Type: Review Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error