sign in sign up
<<
Home , Genius, Lewis Terman

social/emotionalhistorical perspectives needs Jennifer L. Jolly, Ph.D.

TitleLewis of Terman: the Column Genetic Goes Study Here of — LookingElementary Like School This Students

“If I am remembered very long after my death, it Seven ‘Bright’ and Seven ‘Stupid’ Boys,” set the probably be in connection with my studies of stage for Terman’s eventual study of gifted children. gifted children [and] the construction of mental Within a decade of his appointment at Stanford, tests” (Terman, 1930a, p. 330). Terman began to collect data for the most extensive and enduring longitudinal study on identified gifted Although the field of generally children (Chapman, 1988; Minton, 1988). recognizes the foundational work of , Although the longitudinal study of gifted chil- rarely does one stop to examine the details of his dren was a defining feature of Terman’s career, so longitudinal study and their connection to present- too, was his work with tests. However, a day gifted education. This column reexamines the strict line of demarcation cannot be drawn between beginnings of Terman’s longitudinal study with a the two areas because Terman’s definition of gifted- focus on elementary-school-aged children. ness was so closely tied to that of intelligence. In I In 1910, Lewis Terman arrived at Stanford 1913, building on Stern’s transformation of Binet’s University to begin a tenure that would last the mental age to (IQ), Terman remainder of his academic career. He originally sensed that further validation of the Binet-Simon moved to for health and financial reasons, scale would have “great importance for the educa- taking a position as a high school principal, and only tional treatment of . . . talented children” (Terman, found himself at Stanford after a stint at Los Angeles 1913, p. 104). He called for further research “for the Normal School and a confluence of factors that had purpose of ascertaining more definitely what perfor- worked to his advantage. Stanford was an institu- mances may rightly be expected of . . . 125 percent tion where he aspired to work but never believed he intelligence at the various age levels” (Terman, 1915, would find a position. At the age of 33, he worried p. 537). In addition, Terman proposed that the use that securing a good university position was quickly of intelligence tests could go far beyond that of mere slipping from his grasp (Terman, 1930a). Shortly categorization, and important insights could be after his arrival at Stanford, he began to establish made concerning race, the behavior of intelligence himself as leader in intelligence testing with his over time, genius, and mental stability (Lagemann, membership on the Committee on the Psychological 2000). Examination of Recruits during World War I, along Since 1911, Terman had received reports of with his work on the revision of Binet’s intelligence gifted children and conducted his own case stud- test (Seagoe, 1975). His documented interest in ies. This work was conducted on a small scale and individual differences and intelligence, originating disrupted by Terman’s contribution to World War with his dissertation entitled “Genius and Stupidity: I’s and Beta tests. However, in 1921, A Study of Some of the Intellectual Processes of Terman was presented with an opportunity to

gifted child today 27 Lewis Terman: Genetic Study of Genius

engage in a large-scale study of gifted superstitious in its origin, that 1. two intelligence tests (Stanford- children, thanks to a grant from the intellectual precocity is patho- Binet and National [Intelligence Commonwealth Fund. At the time, logical; (c) the vigorous growth Test] B) [both authored by the Commonwealth Fund earmarked of democratic sentiment in . . . Terman and Terman and Yerkes, $100,000 for educational endeavors. America . . . which has necessarily respectively]; One fifth, or $20,000, of the funds tended to encourage an attitude 2. a two-hour educational test (The was awarded to Terman to advance unfavorable to a just apprecia- Stanford Achievement Test) [also the study of gifted children. The main tion of native individual differ- authored by Terman]; study questions included ences in human endowment; 3. a fifty-minute test of general and (d) the tardy birth of the information in science, history, whether gifted children are as , and the arts; biological sciences, particularly well endowed physically as oth- 4. a fifty-minute test of knowledge genetics, and educa- ers, what their hereditary ante- of and interest in plays, games, tion. (Terman, 1925, p. vii) cedents are, what the influence and amusements; of environment upon them has 5. a four-page interest blank to be amounted to, how their superior The basic purpose of his research filled out by the children; ability is evidenced in school, in was to determine to what degree the 6. a two-months reading record to play, and in spontaneous activi- gifted child varied from the average be kept by the children; ties, what kinds of tests will most child of normal intelligence. In the 7. a sixteen-page Home Information readily reveal their superior- grant application submitted to the Blank, to be filled out by parents, ity, whether it is permanent or Commonwealth Fund, Terman artic- including ratings on twenty-five ephemeral, what difficulties such ulated the purpose in much more suc- traits; children encounter in adapting cinct terms: (a) increase the number of 8. an eight-page School Information themselves to their surround- subjects to 1,000, (b) administer two Blank to be filled out by the ings, and so on. (Unknown cor- intelligence tests to each subject, (b) teachers, including ratings on the respondent, 1921, p. 695) collect achievement data on four to same twenty-five traits as were rated by the parents; and Fortified with the grant from the five school subjects, (c) administer spe- 9. when possible, ratings of the Commonwealth Fund, and methods cialized ability tests to a small number home on the Whittier Scale for and instruments from the science of of subjects, (d) revise methods of col- psychology, Terman began his Genetic lecting trait ratings and demographi- home grading. (Terman, 1925, Studies of Genius: Mental and Physical cal data, and (e) follow-up on subjects p. 8) Traits of a Thousand Gifted Children over a 10-year period. In 1922, the (1925), which was to become the Commonwealth Fund awarded The additional grant money most comprehensive compilation of Terman an extra $14,000 to collect from the Commonwealth Fund and allowed for seven empirically gathered data on gifted additional medical, anthropomet- further data points to be collected, children of its time (more than 600 ric, and psychological data. Stanford including medical examinations, pages). According to Terman, a con- University matched these funds with anthropometric measurements, char- fluence of factors had hindered “the $14,000 in both money and services acter and personality tests, interest inauguration of research in this field” (Terman, 1924a, 1924b, 1925). (Terman, 1925, p. vii). He identified tests, organization of a reading guide Combined with the initial award from these factors as for gifted children, study of specialized the Commonwealth Foundation, abilities, and the biographical study . . . the nature of superstitions, Terman had nearly $50,000 to begin of eminent individuals similar to the regarding the essential nature his study. In today’s money, this would works of Galton, Cattell, and Yoder of the Great Man . . . moved equate to $619,938 (U.S. Department (Terman, 1925, 1930b). In total, by forces which are not to be of Labor, n.d.). Field assistants and Terman identified 16 data collection explained by (a) the natural volunteers initially collected nine data points from which massive amounts of laws of human behavior; (b) the points from each subject, including data were accumulated. The categories widespread belief, hardly less the following: ranged from Racial and Social Origin,

28 winter 2008 • vol 31, no 1 Lewis Terman: Genetic Study of Genius to Test of Character and Personality Traits. Table 1 The number of subjects reached Classification of the Gifted Groups 1,444 in 1924, with several con- Boys Girls Total trol groups of 600 to 800 children. Main Experimental Group (I) 370 314 684 Terman’s assistants scoured the state Outside Binet Group (II) 197 159 356 of California for gifted children. Los Angeles, San Francisco, Oakland, Outside High School Group (III) 257 121 378 Berkeley, and Alameda were the main Special Ability Group (IV) 10 16 26 cities of interest, with the heaviest Note. From Terman (1925), p. 39. concentration of children in the Bay Area near the Stanford University Student Data tion of adult achievement and social campus. Students were initially class to show that it also was correlated selected by teacher nomination and Family Background to early childhood (Terman, 1924a). age-grade status (youngest children in “Our data show that individuals of the class). Candidates were given the The majority of students came the various social classes present these National Intelligence Test, and those from Western Europe of Caucasian same differences in early childhood, a who scored in the top 10% were then or Jewish ancestry, as noted: 30.7% fact which strongly suggests that the administered an abbreviated version English, 15.7% German, 11.3% causal factor lies in original endow- of Stanford-Binet. A nonlanguage ver- Scotch, 9.0% Irish, and 5.7% French, ment rather than in environmental sion also was used to account for chil- and 10.5% Jewish. Terman noted the influences” (Terman, 1925, p. 66). dren with foreign-born parents. The excess of children from Scotch and Terman also would argue that, siblings of already nominated students Jewish heritages. Ethnic origin was despite the occupation levels held by also were tested to identify additional determined from a child’s grandpar- the fathers, few families were wealthy. subjects. Accidental discoveries were ents’ origin. Groups lacking represen- The yearly mean income was $4,705 made when the nominated child was tation despite their presence in the and the median income was $3,333, absent and another child was sent in general population included African with 35.3% of the families reporting his or her place, or in some cases the American, Italian, Portuguese, and an income below $2,500. However, child messenger took the wrong child Mexican. Chinese children at the time this was well above the reported aver- to the field assistant (Terman, 1924a, attended “oriental schools” (Terman, age annual salary of $1,236 in 1925. 1925, p. 56) and were not included 1924b, 1925). Although teacher nom- Several of the families lived in what in the study (Terman, 1924a, 1925). inations were used, the final criteria Terman considered poverty (Terman, There also were several children in the for inclusion of subjects in the main 1925). sample from ethnically mixed mar- experimental group consisted of those Home ratings were conducted riages, including a Japanese American subjects who scored an IQ of 140 or using the Whittier Scale for Grading family whose 4 out of 5 children above. Table 1 shows how many boys qualified for Terman’s study. Terman Home Conditions. Criteria included and girls were in each of the gifted described them as “a remarkable fam- necessities, neatness, size, parental groups. ily, and the fact that it is the result of a conditions, and parental supervision, Terman’s initial comments centered mixed marriage makes it doubly inter- which were rated on a scale from 1 to on the greater number of boys than esting” (Terman, 1925, p. 107). 6. Unselected homes had a mean of girls identified in the sample. He con- Terman also classified students 20.78, whereas homes of the gifted cluded that the findings directly sup- according to their father’s occupation. scored 22.94. The largest deviation was ported the hypotheses that males are Classifications for the sample were revealed when comparing the homes more variable than females, which in 31.4% professionals, 50% semiprofes- of the gifted with homes of delinquent turn provided evidence that “excep- sional/business, 11.8% skilled labor, students whose mean score was 13.91. tionally superior intelligence occurs and 6.8% semiskilled and unskilled Parental supervision reflected for the with greater frequency among boys labor. Drawing from previous research, largest discrepancy between scores than girls” (Terman, 1925, p. 54). Terman connected the high correla- (Terman,continued 1925). on page ??

gifted child today 29 Lewis Terman: Genetic Study of Genius

At least one fourth of early as clearly as in the the gifted students had achievements of adult life a parent who had gradu- At least one fourth of suggests that the causes ated from college, and are to be sought in native the mean for grades com- the gifted students endowment rather than in pleted was 12 with a SD the environment and edu- of 3.5. For grandfathers, cation” (Terman, 1925, p. the mean was 10.8 and had a parent who 134). 9.7 for grandmothers. Dr. Bird T. Baldwin On average the parents had graduated headed up the team that of the gifted children had gathered the anthropo- completed twice as much metric measurements of schooling as the average from college . . . On the children. Thirty-seven adult (Terman, 1925). measurements were taken This initial demographic average the parents on each child, totaling data yielded a population 21,978 measurements that was White, middle of the gifted children for 594 children. The class, and with parents compiled and analyzed holding advanced school- data revealed that gifted ing when compared to had completed twice children from California the average population, measured better in weight and an overrepresentation as much schooling and height in compari- of children of Jewish heri- son to the best averages tage. Terman attributed for American children. this “indirect evidence that as the average adult (Comparison groups of the heredity of our gifted (Terman, 1925). gifted children were from subjects is much superior Oak Park, IL, and the to that of the average indi- Horace Mann School in Cattell. Mothers reported 3.35 births, vidual” (Terman, 1925, p. 83). New York.) Up to the age of 12, boys which was lower than the 4.7 Galton Another point of interest con- exceeded girls in all measurements reported nearly 50 years earlier. Infant cerned the prevalence of superior rela- taken. However, after 12 years of age, tives in children’s family trees. Several mortality was generally low. Fathers’ girls surpassed the boys in height, families could identify relatives who average age at the birth of a gifted child weight, chest and hip measurements, were Presidents or Vice-Presidents of was 33.63 years (SD + 7.70) whereas and stem length. The coefficients of the , writers, generals, mothers’ age was 29.01 (SD + 5.64). correlation for all measurements were statesmen, and Supreme Court jus- Cattell’s study reported an average of high for both age and gender, which tices. Terman saw this as evidence to age 35 for fathers and 29 for mothers, ranged from .322 to .851 (Terman, support Galton’s theory of the herita- and Galton’s study reported 36 years 1924b, 1925). “The results of this bility of genius. However, he also rec- of age of fathers and 30 for moth- investigation show that the gifted ognized the limits of these data and ers. The most salient figures focused group is, as a whole, physically supe- believed more exact data would be on birth order, which showed nearly rior to the various groups used for needed to “reveal the laws by which exact agreement with Cattell’s study. comparison” (Terman, 1925, p. 171). superior mental ability is transmitted” Cattell and Terman both found that Further medical examinations were (Terman, 1925, p. 111). gifted children were more likely to be given to 783 gifted children, of whom first-born in families of two or more. 591 belonged to the main experimen- Health and Hygiene This evidence also supported previous tal group, in order to obtain current studies that first-born children also medical information. Dr. Moore (Los Vital were gathered from had higher levels of achievement in Angeles Region) and Dr. Bronson 91 families for comparison against adult life. “The fact that superiority (San Francisco/Bay Area Region) were statistics compiled by Galton and of the first born registers in childhood responsible for the medical examina-

30 winter 2008 • vol 31, no 1 Lewis Terman: Genetic Study of Genius tions and write-ups for each, tak- (P.Q.), was determined by dividing ing, insatiable curiosity, extensive ing one and a half hours per child; the standard age of the child’s grade information, retentive memory, early considerable time was given to this by the child’s age at midterm. Terman speech, unusual vocabulary, etc.” endeavor. Examination was made of determined the average P.Q. for gifted (Terman, 1925, p. 287). Most of the the skin, head, ears, eyes, nose, mouth, children was 114, which meant that parents did not report any contrived neck, chest, abdomen, genitals, back, on average gifted children were accel- means of child training but let their extremities, bones, joints, muscles, erated 14% when compared to unse- children’s intellectual development tendons, cranium, endocrine glands, lected children. He also noted that grow naturally, by generally answer- urine, blood, blood pressure, radio- the gifted child was 48% above the ing questions and helping a child to graphs, and basal metabolism. General norm in intelligence but accelerated develop his or her interests. With these conclusions by both doctors were that only 14%, thus leaving the child 34% data Terman furthered his argument gifted children were physically supe- underpromoted. At age 9 this trans- that superior intelligence is caused by rior when compared to children of the lated to being retarded three grades heritability rather than intelligence same age in the general school popula- and by age 12 this expanded to four training (Terman, 1925). tion. grades. Although 85% of the children had been promoted one grade, their In order to gather a more precise [Dr. Moore:] In regard to a gen- teachers claimed that 82% warranted measurement of educational achieve- eral comparison of this group further promotion. By calculating ment, the Stanford Achievement Test with unselected children, it is my mental age, a discrepancy of 2.8 years and its subtests were administered opinion that major and minor was formed for first graders when to 543 children of the main experi- defects are much less common compared to chronological peers, and mental group in elementary science, in the former. In my opinion by fifth grade this discrepancy grew hygiene, and geography; language and the physical superiority of the to approximately 5 years (Terman, literature; history and civics; and the gifted group is indicated by the 1924a, 1924b, 1925). arts. Test results were compared to the higher average of nutrition and Educational history was gath- test scores of unselected school chil- by superior stability, physical ered from teachers and parents of dren. Across all ages and sexes, gifted and mental. (as cited in Terman, children in the experimental group. children scored between three and 1925, p. 251) Teachers generally rated the work of four standard deviations above unse- gifted students as superior to those in lected school children on measures of [Dr. Bronson:] The examina- the same grade. Gifted students also achievement. On average, the gifted tions of the gifted group were report changing schools at least twice child exhibited mastery of subject mat- the most satisfactory of any before age 8 and three times by age ter 40% above his or her chronological series of examinations I have 11. The majority of parents indicated age while only being promoted 14% conducted. The quickness of that their children enjoyed school and above the norm for his or her chrono- these children in comprehend- learned to read before starting school. logical age. Children’s test scores were ing what was desired of them in Nearly 20% reported that their child appreciably higher than the teachers’ the various tests was a delight. learned to read before the age of 5. ratings presented in the educational Physically, also, the gifted child Seventy percent of the parents did not progress section (Terman, 1925). ranked above the average child place restrictions on a child’s advance- Terman attributed this to teacher of the community. (as cited in ment in school with 20% lobbying Terman, 1925, p. 251) for rapid advancement and only 10% underestimations or “low marks as holding a child back. Six and a half a penalty for lack of application to Educational Progress hours a week were devoted to private the set tasks of the school” (Terman, lessons and practice in subjects such 1925, p. 306). No correlation was School progress and educational as , language, or dance, and 2 shown between number of years of history were natural topics for data col- hours per week were devoted to com- school and educational achievement. lection. Terman argued that individual pleting homework. Parents reported Terman also described the Stanford differences directly affected schooling signs of superior intelligence at age 3½ Achievement Test as “an excellent test for gifted students (Terman, 1919). (Terman, 1925). Superior intelligence for use in the identification of gifted School progress, or progress quotient was described as “quick, understand- children”continued (Terman, on1925, page p. ?? 306).

gifted child today 31 Lewis Terman: Genetic Study of Genius

Life Outside of School and 808 control children. Children by gifted students directly impacted were asked to keep a reading log for the kind of education they received. Terman also was interested in two months including all books read. Terman (1924a) declared, gifted children’s familiarization Results indicated that gifted children and interest in playing. The general read a greater variety of books than . . . the desirability of more rapid belief was that gifted children devi- did control group children; however, advancement of the bright child. ated tremendously from the norm in of the 20 best-liked books, all but one This is important. But grade this area, spending the majority of was fiction. Only five books appeared skipping is far from an ideal or their free time reading in solitude. on the best-liked list for each gender, complete solution of the prob- Approximately 1,200 gifted children including Treasure Island, Call of the lem. The real need is for a differ- were administered an eight-page Wild, Ivanhoe, Three Musketeers, and entiation of the curriculum and booklet that delineated 90 games A Tale of Two Cities. Girls were more of methods such as will give to into three categories: solitary games likely than boys to read a book more every child the type of diet from (e.g., riding a bike), games that were than once. One unsurprising fact was which he can derive the maxi- social but not always competitive that gifted children simply read more mum nourishment. (p. 364) (e.g., follow the leader), and games books than control group children that were somewhat social and quiet (Terman, 1925). Like any pioneering endeavor, (e.g., checkers). Children were asked Terman’s longitudinal study was if they had ever played the game and Terman’s Legacy flawed and has therefore experienced if they played it well or not. They its share of criticism. Criticisms were also given a multiple-choice sec- lodged against Terman’s study Terman hoped that this body of tion, in which a game was described are valid and some of these same work would be considered a “founda- and the child had to identify what issues continue to trouble the field. tion of established truth” (Terman, game it was. Further information was Beginning with the title of his work, obtained from the Home and School 1925, p. 474) and would dispel the Genetic Studies of Genius, few of Blanks. Gifted children preferred myths and superstitions surrounding Terman’s subjects could be labeled activities that required thinking and gifted children. Educational reform . Genius was considered were somewhat social and quiet. could now be undertaken based on 180 IQ and above (Terman, 1930a). However, a high correlation was scientifically verifiable facts. This And, as his subsequent longitudinal found among group members of the reform would include the identifica- work revealed, many of his subjects same gender (.80) with unlike gen- tion, preservation, and development were highly accomplished but never ders’ correlation very low (.18–.35). of gifted children’s exceptional abilities achieved eminence in their field A significant number of gifted chil- (Burks, Jensen, & Terman, 1930). (Keating, 1991). Terman equated the dren had imaginary playmates or Terman’s study represented the greater number of males identified for lived in imaginary countries. Gifted most ambitious and detailed gathering the study as evidence to support his children were sought out as com- of information regarding gifted stu- theory that males were more variable panions in school at the same rate as dents. That work continues today with than females. This result may have control group children despite being surviving subjects entering their 90s. been due to students initially being much younger than their classmates Between 1921 and 1928, Terman was identified by teachers who gener- (Terman, 1925). able to gather a multitude of informa- ally favored boys (Jolly, 2005). Data Children and parents also were tion and make comparisons covering later showed that females did just as asked to report on the children’s read- intellectual and achievement scores, well as males in academic concerns ing interests and hours spent reading home and school environments, family but in different subject areas (Burks (other than school work). Responding heredity, social interests, and person- et al., 1930). This initial study also to these questions were 429 gifted and ality measures. He supplemented this overlooked the effects of sexism, dis- 401 control children. Many gifted information with case studies to pro- crimination, societal expectations, children were reported to be voracious vide a more detailed picture of gifted stereotypes, and available opportuni- readers from as early as the age of 5. children apart from a pure numbers ties for females (Jolly, 2005). Additional data included a reading perspective. Terman also argued that Terman’s unyielding belief in sci- record mailed from 511 gifted children the individual differences exhibited ence, perhaps led him to ignore some

32 winter 2008 • vol 31, no 1 Lewis Terman: Genetic Study of Genius obvious discrepancies in his findings. broaden the definition of giftedness, Lagemann, E. C. (2000). An elusive science: Terman held steadfast to the idea of the student population remains pre- The troubling history of education research. hereditability rather than environ- dominantly White and often does not Chicago: University of Chicago Press. ment (or a combination of the two) reflect the greater student population. Minton, H. L. (1988). Lewis Terman: Pio- to explain superior intelligence or His recommendations for a differenti- neer in psychological testing. New York: giftedness. On average, families in the ated curriculum have been heeded by New York University Press. study reported higher annual incomes those in the field but find resistance Robinson, A., & Clinkenbeard, P. R. and had completed twice as much when asked to be put into practice by (1998). Giftedness: An exceptionality schooling than the average adult. Due administrators and teachers. examined. Annual Review of Psychology, to their financial status and education, Despite inconsistencies and flaws, 49, 117–139. one can assume that gifted subjects’ Terman’s work gave gifted education Seagoe, M. V. (1975). Terman and the gifted. environments were more enriched and a foothold in academia and was rec- Los Altos, CA: William Kaufmann. that they were provided experiences ognized as a legitimate field of study. Terman, L. M. (1913). Psychological outside of the home. Over the past 80 years, his work has principles underlying the Binet-Simon Many of Terman’s conclusions were given those in the field direction and Scale and some practical considerations contradictory to even his own upbring- continues to shape research studies for its correct use. Journal of Psycho- ing. One may assume that Terman was and classroom practices. GCT Asthenics, 18, 93–104. gifted in his own right, considering that Terman, L. M. (1915). The mental he had been promoted three grades References hygiene of exceptional children. Peda- within the first 3 months of formalized gogical Seminary, 22, 529–537. schooling at the age of 6. In addition, Burks, B. S., Jensen, D. W., & Terman, Terman, L. M. (1919). The intelligence due to his family’s farming obligations, L. M. (1930). Genetic studies of genius: of school children. Boston: Houghton he was only able to attend school 5 to Volume III. The promise of youth: Fol- Mifflin. 6 months out of the year. He readily low-up studies of a thousand gifted chil- Terman, L. M. (1924a). The conserva- admitted to being from unremarkable dren. Stanford University, CA: Stanford tion of talent. School and Society, 19, ancestry, unlike many subjects in the University Press. 359–364. longitudinal study who could name Chapman, P. D. (1988). Schools as sorters: Terman, L. M. (1924b). Tests and mea- relatives that held places of prominence Lewis M. Terman, applied psychology, surements of gifted children. Washing- in politics and academia. His great and the intelligence testing movement, ton Education Journal, 3, 172–190. 1890–1930. New York: New York faith in nature over nurture is also con- Terman, L. M. (1925). Genetic studies of University Press. tradicted by his childhood home envi- genius: Volume I. Mental and physical Davis, G. A., & Rimm, S. A. (2004). traits of a thousand gifted children. Palo ronment, which was filled with a great Education of the gifted and talented (5th number of books (150–200 by his esti- ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Alto, CA: Stanford University Press. mation). Also, as one of 14 siblings, his Feldhusen, J. F. (2003). Lewis M. Ter- Terman, L. M. (1930a). Autobiography older siblings and their interests greatly man: A pioneer in the development of of Lewis M. Terman. In C. Murchison influenced him (Terman, 1930b). ability tests. In B. J. Zimmerman & (Ed.), in autobiog- Other criticisms lodged against D. H. Schunk (Eds.), Educational psy- raphy, Vol. 2 (pp. 297–331). Worcester, Terman include an overreliance on chology: A century of contributions (pp. MA: Press. genetic factors to account for intel- 155–170). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Terman, L. M. (1930b). Talent and genius ligence; the fact that socioeconomic Erlbaum Associates. in children. In V. F. Calverton & S. D. status was not controlled for; the Jolly, J. L. (2005). “The woman question”: Schmalhausen (Eds.), The new gen- sample, being predominantly White, An historical overview of the education eration (pp. 405–423). New York: The of gifted girls. In S. K. Johnsen & J. middle-class, and Jewish, was not rep- Macaulay Company. Kendrick (Eds.), Teaching and counsel- resentative of the overall population in Unknown correspondent. (1921). The ing gifted girls (pp. 3–8). Waco, TX: California at the time; and the use of Prufrock Press. study of gifted students. School and a limited definition of giftedness with Keating, D. P. (1991). Curriculum options Society, 13, 694–695. a narrow focus on IQ scores (Davis for the developmentally advanced: A U.S. Department of Labor. (n.d.). Infla- & Rimm, 2004; Feldhusen, 2003; developmental alternative to gifted tion & consumer spending. Retrieved Robinson & Clinkenbeard, 1998). education. Exceptionality Education November 5, 2007, from http://www. Although strides have been made to Canada, 1(1), 53–83. bls.govcontinued on page ??

gifted child today 33