Literature/Theory-based ReferencesArtiles, A. J., & Zamora-Duran, G. (Eds). (1997). Reducing disproportionate representation of culturallydiverse students in special and gifted education. The Council for Exceptional Children: Arlington, VA.This book discusses the disproportionate representation of students from minority backgrounds in specialeducation and gifted classes, and presents strategies that practitioners can use to better address theeducational needs of all students. Chapter 1 provides an outline of the problem of student placement,disproportionate representation, and misclassification. Chapter 2 criticizes traditional standardizedassessment approaches that disregard students' prior knowledge and cultural differences and proposesthe use of performance assessment approaches. In chapter 3, the cultural influences on student behaviorare discussed as well as the need for educators to be aware of the role of cultural meaning underlyinghuman behavior. Chapter 4 presents guidelines for educators to use to assess students' languageproficiency in order to decide whether a more comprehensive assessment or a pre-referral intervention isneeded. Chapter 5 discusses the under representation of children from minority backgrounds in giftededucation and presents alternative assessment procedures. The final chapter provides a summary ofrecommended practices to address the problem of disproportionate representation. (ERIC abstract).Esquivel, G. B., & Houtz, J. C. (Eds).(2000). Creativity and giftedness in culturally diverse students.Perspectives on creativity. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton.The 11 chapters in this text address issues concerned with identification and educational intervention withgifted students who are from culturally diverse backgrounds. Chapters have the following titles andauthors: (1) "The Culturally and Linguistically Diverse School Population in the United States"; (2)"Culturally Diverse Gifted Students: A Historical Perspective"; (3) "Learning Styles and Creativity inCulturally Diverse Children"; (4) "Social and Emotional Characteristics of Gifted Culturally DiverseChildren"; (5) "Bilingualism and Creativity"; (6) "Multicultural Issues in the Testing of Abilities andAchievement"; (7) "Identifying Gifted and Creative Linguistically and Culturally Diverse Children"; (8)"Educating the Culturally Diverse Child: An Integrative Approach"; (9) "The Quintessential Features ofGifted Education as Seen from a Multicultural Perspective"; (10) "Parents of Gifted Culturally DiverseYoungsters"; and (11) "Evaluation of Gifted and Talented Programs". (ERIC abstract).Kitano, M. K., & Espinosa, R. (1995). Language diversity and giftedness: Working with gifted Englishlanguage learners. Journal for the Education of the Gifted. 18, 234-254.Summarizes the literature on the education of gifted students with primary languages other than Englishor English language learners and suggests guidelines for practice. Characteristics and identification ofthese students are discussed. The adaptation of traditional identification models (e.g., recognition andreferral) is described, and new strategies for identification (including alternative constructs of giftedness)are discussed. Service delivery, instructional methods, and community involvement for gifted Englishlanguage learners are also discussed.Ogbu, J. (1995). Understanding cultural diversity and learning. (Chapter 32 in the "Handbook of <strong>Research</strong>on Multicultural Education," pp, 582-83) ERIC Document Reproduction Services No. ED382727)The author contends that to understand what it is about minority groups, their cultures, and languagesthat makes crossing boundaries difficult, it is necessary to understand that there are different types ofminority groups. Comparative study has resulted in the classification of minority groups as autonomous(minorities primarily in a numerical sense, such as Jews or the Amish), immigrant or voluntary, and castelikeor involuntary minorities. Primary cultural differences, differences that existed before the minority andmajority came in contact, distinguish voluntary minorities, but secondary cultural differences, arising aftertwo groups came in contact, distinguish the involuntary minorities. Understanding the situation ofinvoluntary minority children is imperative in designing education that will meet their needs.(ERICabstract).42
Practice-based ReferencesCline, S. (2001). Gifted children with disabilities. Overcoming stereotypes. Gifted Child Today, 24, 16-24The article deals with the under identification and under inclusion of individuals who are disabled andgifted. Through case studies, the author details the roles which parents, school personnel and society canplay to supported gifted children with disabilities. She concludes: “Experts in gifted education and specialeducation should collaborate on behalf of gifted students with disabilities. Educators can establish avision in which technological, financial and human resources support the development of their students.An articulated vision of the possibilities, for these children should be shared with and supported by schoolpersonnel and community groups. Progress needs to be monitored, and ongoing support provided.”Robinson, S. M. (1999). Meeting the needs of students who are gifted and have learning disabilities.Intervention in school and clinic, 34, 195-204.Describes the characteristics of gifted students with learning disabilities and discusses how teachers canrethink the classroom environment and provide enrichment, structure, and remediation to address theneeds of these twice exceptional learners. The need for collaboration among professionals with variedexpertise is emphasized. (Author abstract).Stormont, M., Stebbins, M. S., & Holliday, G. (2001). Characteristics and educational support needs ofunderrepresented gifted adolescents. Psychology in the Schools, 38, 413-423.Presents the characteristics and needs of adolescent students who are underrepresented in giftedprograms. Addresses the specific populations of young women, students with learning disabilities, andstudents living in poverty. Presents the academic and social-emotional needs of students fromunderrepresented populations, followed by strategies professionals can use to support these students.(ERIC abstract).Vespi, L., & Yewchuk, C. (1992). A phenomenological study of the social/emotional characteristics ofgifted learning disabled children. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 16, 55-72.A series of interviews was conducted with four gifted learning disabled boys ages nine to twelve, theirparents and their teachers. These themes emerged from an analysis of the data. Most of the childrendemonstrated positive social skills in the classroom; however, they did appear to have difficulty inestablishing and maintaining friendships. Differences were noted among individual characteristics withvariations noted in attitudes toward families and in behavior. Overall, the students expressed generallypositive feelings of self-image and self-confidence; however, the are frustrated with theirunderachievement and are afraid of failure. The authors offer these suggestions to educators: effectivelyidentify students who are both LD and gifted; incorporate social/emotional needs into the IEP; fosterpositive interactions with peers; teach cognitive and behavioral coping skills; educate parents, and treatthe whole child.Standard 3: Individual Learning DifferencesGT3K2Academic and affective characteristics and learning needs of individuals with gifts, talents,and disabilities.<strong>Research</strong>-based ReferencesBaum, S. M., Olenchak, F. R. (2002). The alphabet children: GT, ADHD, and more. Exceptionality, 10,77-91.Many bright students demonstrate behaviors that are indicative of more than 1 diagnosis. Over time wesee the birth of the "alphabet child" whose diagnoses include multiple disorders such as attention deficit43
- Page 3 and 4: This book provides a survey of fede
- Page 5 and 6: Castellano, J. A. (1998). Identifyi
- Page 7 and 8: U.S. Department of Education. (1993
- Page 9 and 10: This qualitative investigation expl
- Page 11 and 12: four as “unsuccessful.” A child
- Page 13 and 14: from a comparison school district.
- Page 15 and 16: Cross and Coleman, Feldhusen, Gagn
- Page 17 and 18: Books, and Talents Unlimited. Teach
- Page 19 and 20: Kitano, M. K. (2003). What’s miss
- Page 21 and 22: Russo, C. J., & Ford, D. Y. (1993).
- Page 23 and 24: CEC Knowledge/Skills Evidence-BaseR
- Page 25 and 26: Piechowski, M. M. (1992). Giftednes
- Page 27 and 28: 14-18 in a competitive gifted progr
- Page 29 and 30: Many students of color are not perf
- Page 31 and 32: Bloom, B. S., & Sosniak, L. A. (198
- Page 33 and 34: the academic achievement of 273 ele
- Page 35 and 36: Silverman, L. K. (1997). The constr
- Page 37 and 38: Milbrath, C. (1998). Patterns of ar
- Page 39 and 40: differentiated instruction, student
- Page 41: condition. (adapted from the journa
- Page 45 and 46: Literature/Theory-based ReferencesB
- Page 47 and 48: This book focuses on ways teacher c
- Page 49 and 50: students; and compared the learning
- Page 51 and 52: Standard 3: Individual Learning Dif
- Page 53 and 54: This edited volume delineates couns
- Page 55 and 56: Literature/Theory-based ReferencesA
- Page 57 and 58: schools (one affluent community, on
- Page 59 and 60: Gagné’s Differentiated Model of
- Page 61 and 62: considerations in planning a sound
- Page 63 and 64: Stamps, L. (2004). The effectivenes
- Page 65 and 66: and menus.Standard 4: Instructional
- Page 67 and 68: determining the central purpose or
- Page 69 and 70: Swiatek, M. A. (1993). A decade of
- Page 71 and 72: applications and theoretical modeli
- Page 73 and 74: curricular dimensions that are resp
- Page 75 and 76: Standard 4: Instructional Strategie
- Page 77 and 78: CEC Knowledge/Skills Evidence-BaseR
- Page 79 and 80: Perry, T., Steele, C. & Hilliard, A
- Page 81 and 82: competence and superior adjustment
- Page 83 and 84: challenging and provocative arena.
- Page 85 and 86: the influence of verbal skills on p
- Page 87 and 88: perceived as positive. (ERIC abstra
- Page 89 and 90: Christophersen, E., & Mortweet, S.
- Page 91 and 92: Standard 5: Learning Environments a
- Page 93 and 94:
practical advice for all classroom
- Page 95 and 96:
Kerr, B., & Cohn, S. (2001). Smart
- Page 97 and 98:
CEC Knowledge/Skills Evidence-BaseR
- Page 99 and 100:
Standard 6: Language and Communicat
- Page 101 and 102:
Practice-based ReferencesGavin, M.
- Page 103 and 104:
This article focuses on recommended
- Page 105 and 106:
This study was designed to measure
- Page 107 and 108:
Standard 6: Language and Communicat
- Page 109 and 110:
The authors conclude that more targ
- Page 111 and 112:
Standard 6: Language and Communicat
- Page 113 and 114:
Standard 7: Instructional PlanningG
- Page 115 and 116:
The four parallel approaches to cur
- Page 117 and 118:
suggested curriculum or supplementa
- Page 119 and 120:
Part of the Gifted Treasury Series,
- Page 121 and 122:
Prufrock Press.This teacher-friendl
- Page 123 and 124:
introductory chapter, individual ch
- Page 125 and 126:
all individuals and it improves sel
- Page 127 and 128:
Both of these books outline how to
- Page 129 and 130:
Standard 8: AssessmentGifts and Tal
- Page 131 and 132:
Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.The
- Page 133 and 134:
contribution of dynamic assessment
- Page 135 and 136:
School District's advocacy efforts.
- Page 137 and 138:
students not using the unit.Literat
- Page 139 and 140:
identification of more economically
- Page 141 and 142:
Standard 8: AssessmentGT8S2Use tech
- Page 143 and 144:
eviews the literature related to pr
- Page 145 and 146:
Practice-based ReferencesCallahan,
- Page 147 and 148:
CEC Knowledge/Skills Evidence-BaseR
- Page 149 and 150:
Standard 9: Professional and Ethica
- Page 151 and 152:
Standard 9: Professional and Ethica
- Page 153 and 154:
excellence and equity in education.
- Page 155 and 156:
culturally diverse students. Journa
- Page 157 and 158:
Standard 9: Professional and Ethica
- Page 159 and 160:
elated to giftedness and the prepar
- Page 161 and 162:
Americans (n=580). Approximately 50
- Page 163 and 164:
Standard 10: CollaborationGifts and
- Page 165 and 166:
Sixty-three Latina women (43 doctor
- Page 167 and 168:
Standard 10: CollaborationGT10S1Res
- Page 169 and 170:
associations, burnout, and resource
- Page 171 and 172:
activities with insects and arthrop
- Page 173 and 174:
“kids can make a difference!”St
- Page 175 and 176:
Rash, P. K. (1998). Meeting parents
- Page 177 and 178:
Standard 10: CollaborationGT10S4Col
- Page 179 and 180:
the interface with general educatio
- Page 181 and 182:
for gifted Hispanic LEP students an
- Page 183 and 184:
student portfolios, the Torrance Te
- Page 185:
Parker, J. (1996). NAGC standards f