TerrieYang APLangP4 10/25/13 AnnotatedBibliography

Brulles,Dina,Ph.D,RachelSaunders,andSanfordJ.Cohn.ImprovingPerformanceforGifted StudentsinaClusterGroupingModel.JournalfortheEducationoftheGifted34.2: 32750.Print.

Thisarticlediscussesastudycomparingchangesinstudentperformanceofgiftedstudentsin clusteredvs.nonclusteredclassrooms,concludingthatgiftedstudentsplacedinaclustered settingwithspeciallytrainedteachersperformsignificantlybetterthanthoseinatraditional classroomsetting.Thesefindingswerebasedonaschooldistrictwithprimarilylow socioeconomicstatusandincludingstudentsfromavarietyofethnicityincludingHispanics, AmericanIndians,andAsians.

AuthorDinaBrullesmayhaveabiastowardtheclustermodelbecausesheisthedirectorof giftededucationinanArizonanschooldistrictandisrecognizedforimplementingcluster grouping.However,thearticleisacrediblesourcebecauseitcomesfromtheJournalforthe EducationoftheGifted,whichisapeerreviewedacademicjournal.

Thistopiccouldbecontroversialbecausestrongargumentscouldbemadeforboththe advantagesanddisadvantagesofclustergrouping.However,thisarticleclearlylaysoutthe benefitsofclustergroupingforgiftedkidsintermsofacademicsuccess.Ithinkclustergrouping makesalotofsensebecausethengiftedstudentswouldhaveotherpeersattheirleveltolearn andinteractwithandwouldntbeasisolated.Icouldargueforclustergroupingasa complementtotheworkshopprogramintheWestportschoolsystembecausejustacouple hoursaweekisntreallygoingtomakethatmuchofadifferenceintheeducationofgifted children,butimplementingtheclustergroupingmodelwouldprovidegiftedkidswithadaily

opportunitytobechallenged.

Corville,Keith,andZacharyDeRouen.MinorityBiasinIdentificationandAssessmentofGifted Students:AHistoricalPerspectiveandProspectsfortheFuture.Rept.no.ED507650. N.p.:n.p.,2009.Print.

Thisreportdiscussesbiasagainstminoritiesintheidentificationprocessofgiftednessincluding bothteacherrecommendationsandIQtests,claimingthatAfricanAmerican,Hispanic,and NativeAmericanstudentsarefarlesslikelytobeidentifiedasgiftedbecauseofteacherbias andadisadvantageintestingbecauseofalanguageorculturalbarrier.Thereareafew proposalsonhowtocombatthissituationsuchastrainingteacherstobetteridentifygiftedness regardlessofethnicity,gender,orsocioeconomicclass,andbroadeningthetestingmethods usedsothattheydontinadvertentlydiscriminateagainstminorities.

ThisappearstobeareportwrittenbytwostudentsatLouisianaStateUniversitysoitis probablyaccuratebutnotveryreputable.However,thereportincludesathoroughworkscited withmanyreferencestothesourcesthroughoutthereportwhichhelpstoraiseitsvalidity.

ThisreportcouldbeusefulifIwantedtotalkabouttherelationshipbetweenethnicityand socioeconomicsandgiftednessandhowtherehasalwaysbeenadisparitybetweenminorities andCaucasians.Somethingthatmightbeinterestingtolookmoreintowouldbewhetherornot differentculturesorethnicitiesmanifestgiftednessindifferentways,andhowthosedifferences canbemeasured.Also,IwonderwhyAsiansarenottypicallyunderrepresentedingifted programswhereasAfricanAmericans,Hispanics,andNativeAmericansare.Isthedisparity morearesultofethnicityorsocioeconomicclass? Ethnocentricity:IgnoringMulticulturalPerspectivesofIntelligenceandAbility.RethinkingGifted Education.Ed.JamesH.Borland.NewYorkCity:TeachersCollege,2003.14647.Google Books.Web.24Oct.2013.

Thispassagearguesthatgiftednessisasocialconstructthatdiffersaccordingtocultureand socialvalues.Americanstendtovalueacademicintelligenceandviewgiftednessasaninherent intelligence,whereasmanyEastAsiancountriesviewgiftednessasadevelopmentaltraitthatis dependentonachildsenvironmentgrowingupandtheirdiligenceandhardwork.These varyingpointsofviewarereflectedintheidentificationofgiftedchildrenandplayaroleinthe disparitybetweenethnicitiesinAmericangiftedprograms.

ThisisareliablesourcebecauseitisapublishedbookeditedbyJamesBorland,areputable professorwhoisveryknowledgeableinthefieldofgiftededucation.HehasaPh.D.from TeachersCollegeinspecialeducationwithanemphasisingiftededucationandhaswritten severalbooksonthistopic.

Ifoundthispassageparticularlyinterestingbecauseitacknowledgesthatgiftednessisreallya madeupideaandcandiffersignificantlybasedonasocietyscultureandbeliefs.Whatone country,state,orevenschooldistrictdefinesasgiftednesscouldbedifferentthanwhatanother onesview.Itwouldbeinterestingtodomoreresearchonhowgiftednessdiffersacross differentcultures.Iwonderifothercountrieshavedifferentstandardsforgiftednessordifferent methods/programsforeducatinggiftedchildrenthatcanbeimplementedhereinWestportif theyarefitting.

IbataArens,KathrynC.RacetotheFuture:InnovationsinGiftedandEnrichmentEducationinAsia, andImplicationsfortheUnitedStates.AcademicSciences(2012):n.pag.PDFfile.

ThisarticlecomparesthegiftededucationsystembetweentheUnitedStatesandvariousAsian countries,outliningtheirhistories,components,andimplicationsonthesuccessofthecountryas awholenowandinthefuture.TheUnitedStatesconsistentlyrankslowestincomparisontothe othercountriesinmath,science,andreadingperformance,indicatingthatitcouldbenefitusto considerthedifferentmethodsthatothercountriessuchasChina,Korea,andSingaporehave tooffer,suchasanationallysupportedprogramandmoreextensiveinterventionsforgifted

students.

AuthorKathrynC.IbataArenshasPh.D.inpoliticalsciencewithanemphasisinInternational Relations.SheseemstohaveabiastowardthesystemofAsiancountriessinceshecategorizes theU.S.asAleaderfallingbehind.ThearticlewaspublishedbyAdministrativeSciences, whichisareputablepeerreviewedacademicjournal.

ThisarticlecouldbereallyusefulifIchosetocomparethegiftededucationsystemintheU.S. withthatofdifferentcountriesinAsia,particularlySingapore.Thearticlecontainsbothstatistics anddescriptionsofthedifferentcountriesprogramsthatcouldbeusefulinthecomparison.The articleseemstoexemplifySingaporeabovemanyoftheothercountriesandgivescreditfor muchofthecountryseconomicandtechnologicalsuccessrightnowtotheimplementationof theirgiftedprogramafewdecadesago.Inthisageofglobalcompetition,theU.S.couldbenefit fromimplementingsomeoftheothercountriesgiftededucationpracticesiftheyareshownto playasignificantroleinthefuturesuccessofthecountry.IcouldarguethatWestportshould takethisinitiativeandmakechangestothegiftedprogramincollaborationwiththeongoing singaporewestportprojecttakingplacealready.

Kaufman,ScottBarry,Ph.D.WhoIsCurrentlyIdentifiedasGiftedintheUnitedStates?The CreativityPost.Ed.RebeccaMcMillan.N.p.,4Jan.2012.Web.21Oct.2013. <http://www.creativitypost.com/education/who_is_currently_identified_as_gifted_in_the_united _states>.

Thisarticleanalyzesandcomparesthedefinitionsofgiftednessandidentificationmethodsin eachstateoftheU.S.,concludingthatwhileIQtestsarestillthemainmethodused,most schoolsnolongerrelyonjustoneIQscoretodeterminecutoffs.Theauthorcriticizesschools forinadequatelyfactoringincreativity,motivation,andtheartsintheprocessofscreeningfor giftedness,andarguesthattheidentificationprocessshouldbemultidimensionaland multifaceted.

AuthorScottKaufmanisacognitivepsychologistwhohasstudiedatbothCambridgeandYale, andnowteachespsychologyandintelligencecoursesatNYU.Hehasdonealotofstudyand writingincludingmanyarticlesandbooksonintelligenceandcreativity.Thisarticledefinitelyhas abiasedpointofviewbecausethesiteiscofoundedbytheauthorandiscalledTheCreativity Post,indicatingevenbeforeknowinganythingabouttheauthorthatthearticlewillbeadvocating amoreinnovativeperspectivetogiftedness.

Thisfitsinwiththearticleonhoweducatorsvaluedifferentidentificationmethodssinceit includesstatisticsonhowmanystatesusecertainmethods.Icouldcomparehoweventhough teachersvaluestudentobservationsasoneofthemosteffectiveidentificationmethods,noneof thestatesexplicitlystateobservationsasoneoftheirmethods.Instead,themajorityrelyon achievementtestsandIQtestsaswellasnominations,implyingthattestscoresarestillthemost standardmethodofidentification.Accordingtothedefinitionsandidentificationsmethods showcasedinthisarticle,itseemsasif,allotherfactorsputaside,giftednessinitssimplestform canbemeasuredbyjustintelligence,byhowsmartyouare.Ofcourseotherfactorsare considered,butintelligenceandachievementseemtobethemainaspectofgiftedness.This leadstoquestionwhethertheabilitytolearnandgraspinformationcanbemeasuredthrough IQ/achievementtestsifakidhadnotbeenexposedtoasmuchknowledgebeforehand,orin otherwords,dotheresultsofthesetestscomefrominnateintelligenceoraretheyinfluencedby theenvironmentandopportunitiesachildhashadgrowingup?

Schott,Paul.ChangesmappedforWestportschoolsgiftedprogram.CTPost24Dec.2011:n.pag. CTPost.Web.24Oct.2013. <http://www.ctpost.com/local/article/ChangesmappedforWestportschoolsgifted2422607. php>.

ThisarticlesummarizesthepathofthegiftedprogramhereinWestportinthenextfewyears, statingthatgiftededucationwillbemoreintegratedintoacurriculumandwillbemore

individualizedforgiftedstudents.Teacherswillalsoreceivemoretraining,andtheWorkshop CurriculumCommitteewillbeconsideringimplementingclustergrouping.

PaulSchottisareporterfortheGreenwichTimes,andCTPostisadecentlyreliablesourcefor localConnecticutnews.

SincetheBoardofEdisalreadyconsideringmakingalotofthechangesthatIresearched aboutsuchasindividualizinggiftededucationandimplementingclustergrouping,Imnotreally surewhatmyoriginalargumentwillbeyet.However,Idliketofindouthowmanyofthese changeshaveactuallybeenmadeinthepasttwoyearssincethisarticlewaspublished.After beingpartoftheWorkshopprogramfor6years,Ipersonallyhavealottosayabouthow beneficial/effectiveitis,butiftheprogramhasactuallychangedsincethen,Imightnotbeableto arguesomeofthepointsthatIwouldhave.Ithinkitwouldbemoreinterestingtowrite specificallyabouttheWorkshopprograminhereinWestportbecauseitisrelevantandmore practical,butifnotIcouldalsomakesomesortofargumentaboutgiftededucationinAmerica asawhole,eithercomparingittoothercountriesoranalyzingitseffectivenessinisolation.

Schroth,StephenT.,andJasonA.Helfer.IdentifyingGiftedStudents:EducatorBeliefsregarding VariousPolicies,Processes,andProcedures.JournalfortheEducationoftheGifted32.2 (2008):15961.Print.

Thisarticleprovidesbasicguidelinesonwhatconstitutesgiftednessandalookintothepreferred methodsofidentifyinggiftedchildren.TheMarlandapproachfirstintroducedin1973bases giftednessonhighorhighpotentialachievementin5aspects:generalintellectualability (measuredbyIQtests),academicproficiency,(basedongradesandtestscores),creative thinking,leadershipability,andtalentinthearts.DifferentidentificationmethodssuchasTalent Search/SMPYortheSchoolwideEnrichmentModelvaryintheirrequirementsforgiftedness butallgenerallyincludeteacher/parentnominations,certainresultsonstandardizedtests,or performancebasedevaluations.

ThisarticlewaspublishedinafairlyrecentissueoftheJournalfortheEducationoftheGiftedso itisstillveryrelevantandreputable.Bothauthorsareassociateprofessorsofeducational studiesatKnoxCollege,andoneoftheauthors,StephenSchorth,waselectedtoaleaderof theNationalAssociationforGiftedChildren.Schrothmainlyfocuseshiseffortsonpreserving theartsineducationbuthasdonealotofresearchandhaswrittenavarietyofpapersongifted education.

Ifeellikethisarticleisagoodstartingpointformyresearchbecauseitprovidesalotofgeneral informationaboutwhatdefinesagiftedchildandhowtheycanbeidentified.SomethingIfound interestingwasthatwhilestandardizedtestswerevaluedaseffective,higherpercentagesof educatorsfeltthatstudentobservations,workportfolios,performancebasedassessmentsby experts,andteachernominationswereallmoreeffectivethanstandardizedtests.Basedonthis data,Idtoresearchandtakeacloserlookatthedifferentmethodsusedtoidentifygifted childrenandhoweffectivetheyare.IwouldintuitivelythinkthatIQtest/otherstandardized testswouldbethemainbasisforidentifyinggiftedchildren,butthisarticlesuggestsotherwise, soitdbeinterestingtoseehowbigofarolethesetestsactuallyplayintheidentification process.

Stepanek,Jennifer.MeetingtheNeedsofGiftedStudents:DifferentiatingMathematicsand ScienceInstruction.N.p.:NorthwestRegionalEducationalLaboratory,1999.Print.

Thispublicationcoversavarietyoftopicsabouthowtobestservegiftedchildreninthe classroomincludingteachingstrategies,howtomeetstudentssocialandemotionalneeds,and examplesofdifferentiatedlearningmethods.Itfocusesespeciallyondifferentiatedinstructionin mathandscienceasameanstokeepgiftedstudentsengagedandchallengedinaregular learningenvironment.

ThisisacrediblesourcebecauseitwaswrittenaspartofaseriescreatedbytheNorthwest

RegionalEducationalLaboratoryinordertoprovideteacherswithacomprehensible, researchbasedstrategiestoimplementintheirclassrooms.Theauthor,JenniferStepanek,is partofthisgroupandhasdonealotofresearchandwrittenworkonthetopicofeducationbut hasabiasinfavorofdifferentiatedinstructionsincesheiswritingthispublication.

Thispublicationisfullofinformationnotonlyonteachingstrategiesbutalsoontheidentification processandhowtosupportgiftedminoritystudentsaswell.ThiscouldbereallyusefulifI chosetowriteaboutchangesthatcouldbeimplementedingiftededucationhereinWestport becausealotoftheinformationinthepublicationisbackedupwithresearchfromsourcesinthe bibliographythatIcouldusetosupportmyargument.Ithinkthatalotofthesuggestionsinthe publicationarevalidandpracticalsuchastheadvantagesofdifferentiatingcontent,pretestingto eliminatebusywork,andtheMostDifficultFirstmethodforpacing.Therearealleasy methodstoimplementinelementary/middleschoolsandwouldreallybenefitstudentsinallowing themtoprogressattheirownrate.

VanTasselBaska,Joyce,RichardE.Lange,andBonnieCramond.InternationalGiftedness(Spring 2006).CenterforTalentedDevelopment.NorthwesternUniversity,n.d.Web.24Oct. 2013.<http://www.ctd.northwestern.edu/resources/displayArticle/?id=148>.

ThisinterviewcomparestheservicesforgiftedstudentsinAmericatothoseinmanyother countriesintheworld.TheintervieweesstatethatAsiancountriessuchasChina,Taiwan, Korea,Singapore,andKoreatendtohavemorecompetitive,centralizedgiftedprograms basedinspecializedschoolsandachievementtests.Studentstakerigorouscoursesatadvanced levels,especiallyinthemathandsciences.TheUnitedStates,ontheotherhand,hasamore lenientdefinitionofgiftednessthatincludesmoreaspectsandfocusesmoreonindividualism, utilizingmorepulloutprogramsasopposedtoacceleratedclassesorspecializedschools.

Allthreeintervieweesareknowledgeableeducatorswithabackgroundingiftededucationand experiencewithinternationalgiftededucation.ThereareallAmericanssotheywillinevitably

haveabiastowardtheAmericansystem,buttheyallseemstobeveryopenmindedtothe methodsofdifferentcountries.TheinterviewwasprovidedasaresourceonNorthwestern UniversitysSchoolofEducationandSocialPolicywebsite.

IfoundthisinterviewafterreadingthepassagefromRethinkingGiftedEducation.Itis consistentwiththebooksideathatgiftednessisasocialconstructandvariesbycountryand culture.Thissourcecouldbereallyusefulbecauseitcontainsalotofinformationonmethods thatothercountriesusetoeducategiftedchildrenthatdiffersignificantlyfromtheUnitedStates. Icouldpresentsomeofthesemethodsandtherationalebehindthemaspartofmypaper.The sourceactuallytalksquiteabitaboutSingaporewhichisfittingbecauseofWestportsnew SingaporeMathsystemandtheongoingpartnershipourschoolscurrentlyhave.Itwouldntbe toofarofftothinkthatwecouldimplementsomeofSingaporesgiftededucationstrategieshere aswelliftheyareproventobebeneficial.

Winebrenner,Susan,andBarbaraDevlin.ClusterGroupingofGiftedStudents:HowToProvide FullTimeServicesonaPartTimeBudget.N.p.:n.p.,2001.ERIC.Web.23Oct.2013. <http://eric.ed.gov/?q=%23E607&id=ED451663>.

ThisisbasicallyanFAQaimingtoinformeducatorsabouttheadvantagesofclustergrouping.It arguesagainsttheconventionalheterogeneouslearningenvironmentandassertsthatcluster grouping,orclumpinggroupsofgiftedstudentsintooneclasswithotherregularstudentsanda specializedteacher,wouldprovidegiftedstudentswiththebestopportunitytobechallengedon acontinualbasiswithadequateattentionfromtheteacher.

SusanWinebrennerhaswrittenabookcalledTeachingGiftedKidsintheRegular Classroomandhasaclearbiasinfavoroftheclustergroupingmodel.However,sheiscredible sincesheisveryknowledgeableinthistopicandhaspresentedmanyworkshopsandseminars acrosstheworldadvocatingherpointofviewandtryingtohelpothereducatorstoimplement themostefficientmethodsofteaching.Inaddition,thispublicationwasfoundontheERIC

databasewhichisareliablesourceforeducationalresources.

ThispublicationwouldbereallyusefulinarguingfortheclustergroupingmodelinWestports elementaryschoolssinceitacknowledgesandrefutesalmostalloftheconcernsagainstcluster grouping.EventhoughtheWorkshopprogramisfun,Ifeellikeitdoesntnecessarilychallenge studentsacademically,itjustprovideskidswithanoutletfortheircreativeenergy.Thismodel wouldreallybenefitourschoolsystembecauseitwouldntcostthetownanyadditionalmoney toimplement(besidesmaybeprovidingtrainingtothespecializedteacher)anditwouldbenefit notonlythegiftedstudentsbutalsoallstudentsbecauseclasseswouldbeslightlymoreuniform inpaceandabilitiesbutwouldinnowaytrapstudentsontoacertaintrack.Giftedstudents wouldhavetheopportunitytolearninamoreunconventional,individualizedwaywhilenot impacting/disturbingtheotherteachersandclassesasopposedtoifthegiftedstudentswere scatteredrandomlyintoseparateclasses.Ithinkitwouldhavebeenreallybeneficialformeand otherfasterpacedlearnerstobegroupedtogetherinaclassinelementaryschoolandgiventhe opportunitytolearnatafasterpaceonadailybasisbutnotbecompletelyisolated(likebeingin aclasswithonlygiftedstudents).