Resource List, 2012

NC AIG Program Standards RESOURCE LIST, 2012

Introduction

The resources presented here are intended as a small sampling of the research base that supports the North Carolina AIG Program Standards. This list includes books, journal articles, monographs, pamphlets, reports, and web resources, many of which can be obtained online at no cost. All are evidence-based, and many include much more detailed references than are found here. We hope you will use the references presented herein as both an evidence base for your district’s AIG plan as well as a source of guidance for implementing best practices in the gifted education field.

Standard 1: Student Identification  Universal access to screening  Multiple identification criteria (aptitude & achievement) and methods (traditional & nontraditional)  Procedures responsive to all populations (diverse, 2E, highly gifted, etc.)  Consistency in procedures throughout LEA  Transparency, availability, and fairness of procedures to families

Borland, J. H. & Wright, L. (1994). Identifying young, potentially gifted, economically disadvantaged students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 38(4), 164-171.  This article reports on a program employing several varied nontraditional assessments which were used to successfully identify very at-risk gifted Kindergarten students for transitional programs and eventual placement in gifted programs. Identification methods used included interviews, portfolios, class observation, dynamic assessment, and more traditional standardized assessments. Follow-up found that most of the identified students who stayed in the program had met or exceeded their expected achievement potential.

Gross, M. U. M. (1999). Small poppies: Highly gifted children in the early years. Roeper Review, 21(3), 207-214.  This article presents an overview of issues facing highly gifted (IQ of 160+) children in the classroom, including issues around identification. It focuses particularly on young children (preschool and early elementary years), but information is relevant to highly gifted students of all ages. The author finds that teacher nomination can be problematic for these students and that parent nomination is generally reliable. A few recommendations about standardized and out-of-level testing for the highly gifted are made.

Johnsen, S. K. (Ed.). (2004). Identifying gifted students: A practical guide. Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.

1  This book is a practical handbook for teachers, counselors, psychologists and administrators who are on the front lines of gifted identification. It covers diverse characteristics of gifted students, the use of varied traditional and alternative methods of assessment (including a technical comparison of 40+ test instruments), and guidelines for development of a standardized identification process for districts.

Johnsen, S. K. (2012). The assessment standard in gifted education: Identifying gifted students. In Johnsen, S. K. (Ed.) NAGC pre-K-grade 12 gifted education programming standards: A guide to planning and implementing high-quality services (71-95). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.  This chapter provides background on the National Association for Gifted Children’s evidence-based standards for identification of gifted students. It includes a literature review on various important aspects of identification including equal access, use of varied assessments, and diversity, and supplies example case studies on identification.

Lewis, J. D. (2001). Language isn’t needed: Nonverbal assessments and gifted learners. Growing Partnerships for Rural Education Conference Proceedings. (ERIC Document ED453026)  This brief paper provides a review of the characteristics of nonverbal ability tests which have been successful in identifying gifted students from rural, minority, non-English-speaking and disadvantaged backgrounds. It also reviews several studies comparing these tests and discusses benefits and disadvantages to each.

Morrison, W. F. & Rizza, M. G. (2007). Creating a toolkit for identifying twice-exceptional students. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 31(1), 57-76.  This article is a good review of the literature on best practices for identifying gifted students with various exceptionalities, including learning disabilities and behavioral disorders. It also presents the results of a qualitative study on the 2E identification process in various types of districts (urban, suburban, and rural). The authors provide evidence-based recommendation for designing a protocol for identifying 2E students.

Naglieri, J. A. & Ford, D. Y. (2003). Addressing underrepresentation of gifted minority children using the Naglieri Nonverbal Ability Test (NNAT). Gifted Child Quarterly, 47(2), 155-160.  This article discusses the validation of a standardized nonverbal and presumably “culture fair” ability test, the NNAT, for the purpose of identifying gifted students. The study found that the NNAT was able to identify a statistically equal number of gifted White, Black, and Hispanic students, suggesting that the NNAT can be useful in avoiding the common problem of minority underidentification for gifted programs.

2 Nasca, D. (1988). The use of non-verbal measures of intellectual functioning in identifying gifted children. (ERIC Document ED296551)  This study investigates the use of traditional intelligence tests in combination with nonverbal measures of ability in final decision-making about gifted identification. Nasca found that a significant minority (ranging from 7% to 28% across three studies) of students passing an initial screening for giftedness would have been subsequently excluded from gifted programs based on the results of a traditional intelligence test but qualified for identification based on the results of nonverbal intelligence tests.

Renzulli, J. S. (Ed.). (2004). Identification of students for gifted and talented programs.Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.  Part of the Essential Readings in Gifted Education series, this book gathers 14 articles covering both practical and academic subjects around the topic of gifted identification. Topics covered include characteristics of and identification procedures for creatively gifted students, effects of race and socioeconomic status on the identification process, and discussion of common myths about gifted students.

VanTassel-Baska, J., Feng, A. X., & Evans, B. L. (2007). Patterns of identification and performance among gifted students identified through performance tasks: A three-year analysis. Gifted Child Quarterly, 51(3), 218-231.  This article analyzes the academic outcomes of students identified for gifted programs using performance-based tasks, which “put an emphasis on the process the student uses to come to an answer rather than whether the student can quickly find the right answer,” rather than traditional assessments. Performance tasks were better than traditional instruments at identifying nonverbally talented students, African American students, and low-income students. Students identified in this manner had different profiles of strengths and weaknesses than traditionally-identified students, and curriculum in their gifted programs needed to be tailored to their special strengths.

Standard 2: Differentiated Curriculum and Instruction  North Carolina standards are adapted to students’ individual needs  Curriculum is accelerated, enriched or otherwise modified to meet the spectrum of ability levels and learning needs  Uses research-based supplemental resources  Includes advanced instruction on global health and economic issues, critical thinking, communication, media literacy, creativity, and other practical skills  Makes use of formative assessment for differentiation  Includes social/emotional components to meet particular needs of gifted students  Fosters collaboration between AIG staff and general ed teachers  Includes a specific differentiation plan

3 Baum, S. M., Cooper, C. R., & Neu, T. W. (2001). Dual differentiation: An approach for meeting the curricular needs of gifted students with learning disabilities. Psychology in the Schools, 38(5), 477-490.  This article addresses issues of differentiation within the regular classroom for the twice-exceptional child. A literature review covers the specific differentiation needs of 2E learners, including special social/emotional needs. Methods of authentic learning are discussed, and strategies for addressing particular academic deficits are considered.

Brown, E. F. (2012). Is Response to Intervention and gifted assessment compatible? Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 30(1), 103-116.  This article discusses the Response to Intervetion model, which is a model whereby children’s learning needs are continually assessed so that intervention for students whose needs aren’t being met can receive timely intervention. The author is particularly concerned with how the RtI model applies to gifted education. Progress monitoring and curriculum-based measurement of progress are important parts of RtI which are especially beneficial for serving gifted students.

Conklin, W. & Frei, S. (2007). Differentiating the curriculum for gifted learners. Huntington Beach, CA: Shell Education.  This volume (available as an ebook) presents a handbook for general education teachers who are differentiating their instruction for gifted students. It provides a basic grounding in the characteristics and needs of gifted students and discusses various research-based methods of differentiation including acceleration, compacting, and enrichment. It also provides tips on identification and a bibliography for further reading.

Cross, T. L. (2011). On the social and emotional lives of gifted children. Waco, TX: Prufrock.  This book provides a comprehensive, evidence-based look at the distinct social and emotional traits of the gifted child. It covers topics such as evidence about stereotyping, bullying, technology, mood and behavioral disorders, and ideas on how to foster healthy social and emotional development in gifted students as well as how to advocate for cultural change to address the causes of common socio- emotional issues.

Gibson, K. L., Rimmington, G. M., & Landwehr-Brown, M. (2008). Developing global awareness and responsible world citizenship with global learning. Roeper Review, 30, 11-23.  This article discusses the importance of including 21st century skills and knowledge in curricula for advanced students for the benefit of both students and society, particularly emphasizing the need for global awareness and intercultural communication and the way this can be achieved through global learning. Global learning entails using modern communication technology to speak to and learn from other learners of different cultures. Global learning is thought to improve

4 global awareness, communication skills, critical thinking, language skills and technology skills. This article also presents a few examples of global learning curriculum units.

Matthews, M. S. (2004). Leadership education for gifted and talented youth: A review of the literature. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 28(1), 77-113.  This literature review examines empirical articles presenting research on leadership among gifted students. Although the various studies differed greatly in their research subjects, methods, and definitions of “leadership,” the author generally found that many leadership traits could be improved through instruction (while others were relatively stable). Mentoring was found to be particularly valuable for fostering leadership skills in gifted students.

Reis, S. M. & Renzulli, J. S. (2004). Current research on the social and emotional development of gifted and talented students: Good news and future possibilities. Psychology in the Schools, 41(1), 119-130.  This literature review focuses on research on special social and emotional needs of gifted children, presenting a synthesis of findings from many different studies as well as recommendations on how best to support the healthy social and emotional development of AIG students.

Sheffield, C. C. & Duplass, J. A. (2009). Creating effective citizens: Unique opportunities for gifted education through the social studies. Gifted Education International, 25, 237-245.  This article discusses the particular value of social studies in the gifted education curriculum, and how it aligns with common characteristics of gifted learners such as “big picture” thinking and interest in global issues. The utility of service learning in civics education is a focus.

Tomlinson, C. A. (Ed.). (2004). Differentiation for gifted and talented students. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.  This book is part of the NAGC’s Essential Readings in Gifted Education series. It collects 11 chapters written by experts in instructional differentiation, covering topics such as fostering collaboration between gifted and general education teachers to improve consistency across classrooms, curriculum compacting, professional development, and case studies of successful implementation of differentiation practices for gifted students.

Tomlinson, C. A., Brighton, C., Hertberg, H., Callahan, C., Moon, T. R., Brimijoin, K., et al. (2003). Differentiating instruction in response to student readiness, interest, and learning profile in academically diverse classrooms: A review of literature. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 27(2/3), 119-145.  This article provides a literature review on various topics regarding differentiation, including the current state of differentiation for the full range of student abilities and needs, teacher attitudes about differentiation, evidence for positive student

5 outcomes when instructional differentiation is used, and evidence-based best practices in differentiation.

VanTassel-Baska, J., Cross, T. L., & Olenchak, F. R. (2009). Social-emotional curriculum with gifted and talented students. Waco, TX: Prufrock.  This guide to developing social-emotional curricula for the gifted covers theories and models to help in the development process, special affective needs of specific populations (such as gifted minority students), and helpful information on interactions between gifted students, teachers, and counselors.

VanTassel-Baska, J. & Little, C. A. (Eds.). (2011). Content-based curriculum for high- ability learners. Waco, TX: Prufrock.  This volume provides research-based information on how to create or choose curriculum materials for gifted students. Included are chapters on how to adapt materials in the various content areas to meet the needs of high-ability learners, how to integrate technology into instruction, and how to align curriculum for gifted students with state standards.

VanTassel-Baska, J. & Stambaugh, T. (2005). Challenges and possibilities for serving gifted learners in the regular classroom. Theory into Practice, 44(3), 211-217.  This article provides an overview of the major barriers to differentiation in regular classrooms and a discussion of why each of these barriers (such as lack of advanced subject matter knowledge, classroom management issues, and lack of planning time) is important to overcome. Strategies for overcoming each of these challenges are discussed.

Standard 3: Personnel and Professional Development  Qualified gifted educators are in charge of development and operation of the LEA’s AIG program  Specific PD requirements are in place for every professional involved in the AIG program (teachers, counselors, administrators)  PD requirements are aligned with AIG program goals and national standards  AIG specialists and teachers are given time to plan and implement what they have been trained to do

Dettmer, P. & Landrum, M. (Eds.). (2005). Staff development: The key to effective gifted education programs. Waco, TX: Prufrock.  This book provides an overview of professional development as part of a well- developed gifted education program, covering topics from the theoretical foundations of staff development to practical issues of planning and implementation to program evaluation.

Hansen, J. B. & Feldhusen, J. F. (1994). Comparison of trained and untrained teachers of gifted students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 38(3), 115-121.

6  This article explores the question of whether certification or endorsement in gifted education actually makes a difference in gifted teachers’ teaching skills and classroom environments. Trained teachers were found to have much higher scores on a teacher observation scale when teaching gifted students than untrained teachers. Students also rated trained gifted teachers higher on their attitudes and classroom environment than untrained teachers.

Kitano, M., Montgomery, D., VanTassel-Baska, J., & Johnsen, S. K. (2008). Using the national gifted education standards for preK-12 professional development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.  This book focuses on national standards for gifted education and how LEAs can develop their local professional development programs and requirements to align with national standards. Program design and evaluation, as well as diversity and teacher needs assessment, are covered in this volume.

Kulieke, M. J. (1986). The role of evaluation in inservice and staff development for educators of the gifted. Gifted Child Quarterly, 30(3), 140-144.  This article addresses the importance of impact evaluation on teacher inservice programs for gifted education. It explores how evaluation can be used at every stage of the inservice process, including planning, formative evaluation, and final program evaluation.

Landrum, M. F. (2001). Resource consultation and collaboration in gifted education. Psychology in the Schools, 38(5), 457-466.  This article endorses collaboration between the AIG specialist and the regular classroom teacher. The author proposes that resource collaboration is beneficial because the gifted child’s education will be more consistent across pull-out and regular classroom experiences and non-gifted children can benefit from the resulting differentiation in the regular classroom. The author goes on to outline a resource consultation and collaboration model from inception and development through implementation.

National Association for Gifted Children. (n. d.). 10 myths about gifted education. Washington, D.C.: National Association for Gifted Children.  This pamphlet, published by the NAGC, provides a quick rundown of common misconceptions about gifted education and explains the truth behind each on. This makes an excellent handout for those unfamiliar with gifted ed and the needs of the gifted child. A resource list and a link to the NAGC website with more information are provided.

National Association for Gifted Children. (2010). NAGC pre-K-grade 12 gifted programming standards: A blueprint for quality gifted education programs. Washington, D.C.: National Association for Gifted Children.  The NAGC’s programming standards are, in large part, the basis for North Carolina’s AIG program standards. The NAGC’s six standards include both student outcomes and best practices for each subsection as well as a glossary of

7 terms and an introduction to the standards. The standards are available for free on the NAGC’s website, as are multiple additional resources.

VanTassel-Baska, J. & Johnsen, S. K. (2007). Teacher education standards for the field of gifted education: A vision of coherence for personnel preparation in the 21st century. Gifted Child Quarterly, 51(2), 182-205.  This article discusses the development of the national standards for gifted teacher certification and provides a research base for each standard. The authors also discuss current challenges with respect to gifted teacher education that should be addressed in the future.

Standard 4: Comprehensive Programming within a Total School Community  Delivers services appropriate for the entire spectrum of gifted learners  Programs are aligned and delivered in accordance with the LEA’s AIG identification policies, goals, and resources  Information about programs and policy are disseminated to all stakeholders within the LEA  Communication exists between and among teachers and schools; services are uniform and transitions are smooth  Collaboration between all stakeholders is invited  Acceleration is offered  Programming is offered for traditionally underrepresented populations  Extracurricular programming for AIG students is offered

*Note: Many of the resources I have already detailed above (particularly those for Standard 2) can apply to this standard. I include additional resources below.

Colangelo, N., Assouline, S. G., & Gross, M. U. M. (2004). A nation deceived: How schools hold back America’s brightest students. Iowa City, IA: The Connie Belin & Jacqueline N. Blank International Center for Gifted Education and Talent Development  A Nation Deceived is the seminal reading on acceleration. It comes in two volumes: Volume I is a summary of key points, while Volume II contains supporting evidence. Both volumes are available for free on the website of the Institute for Research and Policy on Acceleration. This report covers evidence on issues from early entry to kindergarten through subject and grade acceleration, advanced placement, and early high school graduation.

Coleman, M. R. & Johnsen, S. K. (Eds.). (2011). RTI for gifted students: A CEC-TAG educational resource. Waco, TX: Prufrock.  This handbook collects 8 chapters about aspects of applying the RtI model to gifted learners. Topics covered include twice-exceptional students, serving gifted students at tiers 1 and 2, policy implications, and program evaluation.

8 Ford, D. Y., Howard, T. C., Harris, J. J., & Tyson, C. A. (2000). Creating culturally responsive classrooms for gifted African American students. Journal for the education of the gifted, 23(4), 397-427.  This article discusses ways in which the traditional classroom treatment of gifted students can fail gifted racial minority students, who often have different cultural backgrounds than white students and have dealt with prejudice around academic achievement and race. The authors give a description of what a culturally responsive classroom looks like, and puts forward some ideas on how such a classroom environment can be cultivated.

Hughes, C. E. & Coleman, M. R. (Eds.). (2009). Response to intervention [Special issue]. Gifted Child Today, 32(5).  This special issue of Gifted Child Today focuses on resources for educators using RtI with gifted children in their classrooms. Seven feature stories cover such topics as web resources, differing RtI models for gifted students, twice- exceptional learners, and challenges.

Neihart, M., Reis, S. M., Robinson, N. M., & Moon, S. M. (Eds.). (2002). The social and emotional development of gifted children: What do we know? Waco, TX: Prufrock.  This book provides a comprehensive introduction to meeting the social and emotional needs of the gifted child at school. It covers research regarding the needs of the average gifted child as well as special needs of special gifted populations such as racial or ethnic minority students, twice-exceptional students, and profoundly gifted students. Among the issues dealt with are perfectionism, delinquency, depression, and underachievement.

Olszewski-Kubilius, P. & Lee, S.-Y. (2004). The role of participation in in-school and outside-of-school activities in the talent development of gifted students. The Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 15(3), 107-123.  The purpose of this study is to document the participation of gifted students in school and extracurricular activities, and to determine whether this participation is related to student outcomes. Survey results determined that gifted students were generally very involved in extracurricular activities and that these activities could be a good venue for talent development and social bonding.

Stormont, M., Stebbins, M. S., & Holliday, G. (2001). Characteristics and educational support needs of traditionally underrepresented students. Psychology in the Schools, 38(5), 413-423.  This article focuses on the specific needs of gifted girls, twice-exceptional adolescents (specifically those with learning disabilities), and gifted students of poverty. For each of these populations, characteristics are detailed and suggestions on how their needs may best be met by administrators, classroom teachers, and school psychologists are given. The article also offers general strategies for the support of all gifted learners.

9 Standard 5: Partnerships  Partners with families and the community  Shares information freely with stakeholders  Involves stakeholders representative of the community’s diversity in the development of plans  Informs families of opportunities for AIG students consistently and effectively (in their own language)  Intentionally involves families and the community in a meaningful way  Partners with members of the community (including higher ed and local businesses)

Callahan, C. M. & Kauffman, J. M. (1982). Involving gifted children’s parents: Federal law is silent, but its assumptions apply. Exceptional Education Quarterly, 3(2), 50-55.  This article explores the importance of parental input in the early success of gifted children, and the disconnect that is often found between parents and classrooms. As the authors note, federal law about involving parents in decision- making does not apply to gifted children in the same way it applies to disabled children, but the research suggests that schools should reach out to parents anyway.

Linnemeyer, S. A. & Shelton, J. (1991). Minds in the Making: A community resource program. Roeper Review, 14(1), 35-39.  This article focuses on a community resource program for urban gifted youth who are not served by their school gifted program. In it, community members donated time and resources to help provide acceleration and enrichment to the student participants. It discusses the program’s initial goals, its implementation, its challenges and its outcomes.

Maoz, N. (1993). Nurturing giftedness in non-school educative settings: Using the personnel and material resources of the community. In K. Heller, F. J. Monks, & A. H. Passow (Eds.) International handbook of research and development of giftedness and talent (743-752). Oxford: Pergamon Press.  This chapter discusses the varied opportunities for gifted students in the community and especially the universities. It emphasizes the shared benefit that gifted students and community members can take from the experience of working together, especially in the sciences. The particular importance of residential programs is discussed. Although some of the programs covered are specific to Israel, their organization may be used as a model for programs in any environment.

Runions, T. & Smyth, E. (1985). Gifted adolescents as co-learners in mentorships. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 8(2), 127-132.  This article focuses on mentoring as a way to give the gifted learner agency over his or her own education and to involve community members in the lives and

10 educations of gifted students. The authors detail five organizational components of a successful mentorship: screening, training, networking, counseling, and information exchanging. It also touches on some existing gifted mentoring programs, although these are likely out-of-date.

Swassing, R. H. & Fichter, G. R. (1991). University and community-based programs for the gifted adolescent. In M. Birely & J. Genshaf (Eds.) Understanding the gifted adolescent: Educational, developmental, and multicultural issues (176-185). New York: Teachers College Press.  This book chapter looks at the history of American university and community- based gifted programs, including a review of their structure, their “current” status (again, likely out-of-date given the book’s publication year) and suggestions on how to find a summer program that meets students’ needs.

Standard 6: Program Accountability  Plan is developed according to policy and approved by the school board and the state DPI  Implementation of plan and is monitored for fidelity  Use of state funds is monitored for adherence to policy  Student performance data is collected, analyzed, and shared  Representation of traditionally underserved populations is carefully monitored  Data regarding credentials of AIG personnel are maintained  A stakeholder advisory group is involved in periodical review of the program  Feedback from stakeholders is frequently elicited and considered  Program evaluation is conducted frequently (continuously)  Disseminates data from program evaluation to the public  Protects the rights of all AIG students through policies, procedures and practices

Callahan, C. M. (Ed.). (2004). Program evaluation in gifted education. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.  Part of the Essential Readings in Gifted Education series, this volume collects 10 chapters dealing with aspects of conducting a program evaluation. Topics covered include inservice, formative evaluation, models, benchmarking, and case studies of different types of program evaluations.

Hansen, J. B. & Toso, S. J. (2007). Gifted dropouts: Personality, family, social, and school factors. Gifted Child Today, 30(4), 30-41.  This study looks at 14 different cases of gifted students who dropped out of school and explores the reasoning behind their choice to do so. The study found that most of the participants linked their decision to drop out to feelings of not belonging at school, problems with the school’s values, poor relationships with authority figures at school, and lack of challenge. Lack of an advocate at school confounded these troubles. The authors provide recommendations for preventing gifted students from dropping out.

11 Reis, S. M. & McCoach, D. B. (2000). The underachievement of gifted students: What do we know and where do we go? Gifted Child Quarterly, 44(3), 152-170.  This research review looks at underachievement in gifted students and what past studies have determined about the prevalence and reasons for this underachievement, including failure to identify and serve gifted students and failure of gifted programs to meet students’ academic and socio-emotional needs. It also discusses the identification and traits of underachievers and interventions to help them improve.

Speirs Neumeister, K. & Burney, V. (2012). Gifted program evaluation: A handbook for administrators and coordinators. Naperville, IL: Sourcebooks  This handbook provides detailed tips on designing, conducting, and reporting on in-house evaluations of district gifted programs for administrators and coordinators. It includes step-by-step instructions as well as reproducibles to be used during the evaluation process.

VanTassel-Baska, J. (2006). A content analysis of evaluation findings across 20 gifted programs: A clarion call for enhanced gifted program development. Gifted Child Quarterly, 50(3), 199-215.  For this article, the author conducted evaluations of 20 school districts in various parts of the country and synthesized the results into 9 key areas of concern in program development and implementation. The author discusses possible implications of her findings and next steps for AIG personnel and for researchers.

Web Resources

 The National Association for Gifted Children - http://www.nagc.org/ o Contains plenty of educational resources for educators, parents, and student as well as advocacy material and information about policy  North Carolina Association for the Gifted and Talented - http://www.ncagt.org/ o North Carolina’s state affiliate of the NAGC offers resources about gifted education both general and specific to North Carolina.  The Institute for Research and Policy on Acceleration - http://www.accelerationinstitute.org/ o Part of the Belin-Blank Center at the University of Iowa, this site is an excellent resource for information about acceleration, including guidelines for developing an acceleration policy and information about the Iowa Acceleration Scale.  The Jack Kent Cooke Foundation - http://www.jkcf.org/ o The JKCF focuses on promising low-income learners and provides many research reports and other resources for educational institutions for serving gifted students of need.  The Davidson Institute for Talent Development - http://www.davidsongifted.org/

12 o The Davidson institute focuses on the educational needs of profoundly gifted students, but also provides many resources for educational institutions and a database of nationwide data about gifted education.  The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented - http://www.gifted.uconn.edu/nrcgt.html o Although recently defunded by the federal government, the NRC/GT continues to provide resources such as its large collection of research monographs for free on its website.

Additional Resources

Brody, L. E. (Ed.). (2004). Grouping and acceleration practices in gifted education. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

Castellano, J. A. & Frazier, A. D. (Eds.). (2011). Special populations in gifted education: Understanding our most able students from diverse backgrounds. Waco, TX: Prufrock.

Coleman, L. J. & Cross, T. L. (2005). Being gifted in school: An introduction to development, guidance, and teaching. Waco, TX: Prufrock.

Ford: D. Y. (2011). Reversing underachievement among gifted Black students. Waco, TX: Prufrock.

Gallagher, J. J. & Gallagher, S. A. (1994). Teaching the gifted child. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

Karnes, F. A. & Bean, S. M. (Eds.). (2009). Methods and materials for teaching the gifted. Waco, TX: Prufrock.

Kirk, S., Gallagher, J., Coleman, M. R., & Anastasiow, N. (2012). Educating exceptional children. Belmon, CA: Wadsworth.

Kitano, M., Montgomery, D., VanTassel-Baska, J., & Johnsen, S. K. (2008). Using the National Gifted Education Standards for pre-K—12 professional development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

Rakow, S. (2011). Educating gifted students in middle school: A practical guide. Waco, TX: Prufrock.

Roberts, J. L. & Boggess, J. R. (2011). Teacher’s survival guide: Gifted education. Waco, TX: Prufrock.

Robinson, A., Shore, B. M., & Enerson, D. L. (2007). Best practices in gifted education: An evidence-based guide. Waco, TX: Prufrock.

13 Smutny, J. F. (Ed.). (1998). The young gifted child: Potential and promise, an anthology. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton.

Smutny, J. F. (Ed.). (2003). Designing and developing programs for gifted students. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

Trail, B. A. (2011). Twice-exceptional gifted children: Understanding, teaching, and counseling gifted students. Waco, TX: Prufrock.

VanTassel-Baska, J. (Ed.). (2010). Patterns and profiles of promising learners from poverty. Waco, TX: Prufrock.

VanTassel-Baska, J. & Feng, A. X. (Eds.). (2004). Designing and utilizing evaluation for gifted program improvement. Waco, TX: Prufrock.

Weinfeld, R., Barnes-Robinson, L., Jeweler, S., & Roffman Shevitz, B. (2006). Smart kids with learning difficulties: Overcoming obstacles and realizing potential. Waco, TX: Prufrock.