Gifted Parenting Support: Parenting Gifted Children …

Thanks Lisa Conrad for sharing this:


Source: Gifted Parenting Support: Parenting Gifted Children … Does it Have to Be So ...:

And now for a brief list of books (in no particular order) I (and a few of my closest friends) like on gifted parenting …

• Living With Intensity (Susan Daniels/Michael Piechowski)
• Emotional Intensity in Gifted Children (Christine Fonseca)
• The Survival Guide for Parents of Gifted Kids (Sally Walker)
• Guiding the Gifted Child (James T. Webb, Stephanie Tolan, et al.)
• Academic Advocacy for Gifted Children (Barbara Jackson Gilman)
• Raising a Gifted Child (Carol Fertig)
• A Parent’s Guide to Gifted Teens (Lisa Rivero)
• Making the Choice (Corin Barsily Goodwin/Mika Gustavson)
• When Gifted Kids Don’t Have All the Answers (Jim Delisle/Judy Galbraith)
• Raisin Brains (Karen Johnson Isaacson)
• 5 Levels of Gifted (Deborah Ruf)

          

Why are Singaporean children good at maths? A brief answer.

Futurology and Visual Literacy for young gifted - some recommendations

In one previous post, I have introduced Futurology and Visual Literacy for young gifted learners (http://bit.ly/jsUCcc) by a Prezi presentation, which was showed in our student seminar at UNSW. Now I would like to share my summary paper of that presentation, which includes some recommendations for further researching and/or applying.
@@@

The brief paper will introduce two subjects for gifted students. Futurology would be the enrichment subject for middle school students, and Visual Literacy could be start at grade one as a main and independent subject.

We will answer 3 questions: (1) Do we have to differentiate programs for gifted learners? (2) Why do we choose Visual Literacy and Futurology? (3) How to put the research to use?


1. Differentiating the curriculum for gifted learners.

Throughout recent decades, researchers have been advocating the need of differentiating gifted programs from the “mainstream” education. Maker (1982) asserts that it “must be qualitatively different from the basic program provided for all children”. Borland (1989) also shares the above view, and adds the “defensible differentiated curriculum” where “gifted students should learn that they would not learn in the mainstream” and there are chances for “independent study”. Recently, NSW Department of Education and Training (2004) states the gifted curriculum to meet “what students learn (content), how students learn (process) and how students demonstrate what they have learned (product) in a learning environment.” It is based on Maker (1982)’s model and have familiar with Kaplan (1986, as cited in Davis & Rimm, 2004). As the leading expert in curriculum for gifted students, VanTassel-Baska (in VanTassel-Baska and Little, 2003; VanTassel-Baska & Stambaugh, 2006) also shares the similar thought, with three factors: “content, process, and concept demands”.  (In 2006, they stress the difference in the level of “depth, complexity, creativity, abstractness, and accelerative opportunities provided”)

It means the content factor always takes an important role in gifted program, which, as cited from Mark (1982), should “allowing students to create products that solve real-world problems and for the opportunity to present work to a variety of audiences for authentic feedback”. NSW Department of Education and Training (2004) also announces that the gifted programs should be “focussed on higher-level thinking, creative problem solving, decision making, planning and forecasting.” (emphasis added)

I therefore focus on two kinds of contemporary content for gifted learners: Visual Literacy and Futurology, and show the examples that they are feasibility and they meet the above requirements of differentiating from the general education.

2.      Visual Literacy and Futurology,  basic understanding.

2.1.   Visual Literacy

Debes (1968) first stated the term “visual literacy”, as “the use of visual images as educational aids for teachers, librarians and media” (as cited in Mbelani and Murray, 2009) On the website of the International Visual Literacy Association (http://www.ivla.org), they also pointed Debes (1969) as the first one who coined the term as:  

“Visual Literacy refers to a group of vision-competencies a human being can develop by seeing and at the same time having and integrating other sensory experiences. The development of these competencies is fundamental to normal human learning. When developed, they enable a visually literate person to discriminate and interpret the visible actions, objects, symbols, natural or man-made, that he encounters in his environment. Through the creative use of these competencies, he is able to communicate with others. Through the appreciative use of these competencies, he is able to comprehend and enjoy the masterworks of visual communication.”

In this new century, our children will live and learn differently from the past. Based on “The enGauge 21^st Century Skills”, which declares that the visual literacy, a necessary skill in the 21^st Century, is the ability to “interpret, use, appreciate and create images and video using both conventional and 21st Century media in ways that advance thinking, decision-making, communication and learning.”  (http://www.metiri.com/21/Metiri-NCREL21stSkills.pdf ) I have emphasised and underlined the “images and video” to support that the visual literacy is not limited to the “still images” (such as chart, diagram and map) but also the motion ones (such as film, interactive cartoon, motion infographics).

To let future generations enjoying their full life, the visual literacy should be not only lied inside the mathematics subject (as the statistics’ tool) or textual language (as the illustrated aids). We can see the below citing for reference:

"Young people who are visually literate have more control over their own work and are better able to understand, enjoy and discriminate between images and objects that appear both in familiar environments of the home and neighbourhood, and in less familiar places such as galleries and museums." ( Department of Education and Science (UK), 1991, as cited in  Howe, 1999)

There are also two strong recommendations in advocating visual literacy skill:

“Some years ago, VL skills were considered as students’ future needs. Today, that future is our present: The communication and information revolution has brought about a rather imperialistic in nature, visual culture.”(Avgerinou, 2009)

Felten (2008) emphasizes that “in our rapidly changing world, visual literacy, whether conceptualized as a distinct set of capacities or as part of a larger multimodal literacy, should be recognized among the fundamental goals of a liberal education” (as cited in Avgerinou, 2009)

That is the reason I support visual literacy as the main and independent subject of gifted program from primary school age, a pioneer example in the mainstream education, before it becomes too late. In the part three we will show some real examples and models.

2.2.   Futurology

Future Intelligence or Futurology or Foresight, the terms which are still in a newborn phase in Education, especially in Australia: “Yet in Australian Primary and Secondary schools explicit Futures Education, using the language, concepts and tools of Futures Studies, is currently in its infancy” (Gidley, Batemen, & Smith, 2004).

Future Intelligence could be defined as “the human and social ability required to fashion and implement a desirable future for humanity, for the planet’s biological diversity and for the world” (Shoham, 2010)

However, I use Futurology for expressing that it takes an equal role to the other subjects, such as History, Chemistry, and Geography.

It is not justified if we (the schools) teach children the History (the Now they learn from family and environment), whereas the Future is just for daydreamers, fortune-tellers or science-fiction movies. Bishop (2011), the pioneer expert in foresight education, claims exactly that:

“Schools claim to be preparing their students for the future, but they don’t tell them what that future will be like.  It’s like preparing students to visit a foreign country, but not telling them which country.  While we teach a lot about the past, as we should, where will students live for the rest of their lives?” 

From a domestically view, Shostak (2008) advises:

Our schools can help here in three major ways: (1) We can teach youngsters how to distinguish worthy from poor or even dangerous forecasts; (2) we can nurture optimism concerning the future, as this is a vital source of America’s “can do!” spirit (the envy of nations everywhere); and (3) we can upgrade their awareness of tomorrow’s job market and employer expectations of them, the better to improve their chances of success.

 “The education system has not, to date, responded well to the challenge of applying futures issues in pre-school to secondary educational curricula. (Page, 2000, as cited in Milojević, 2002) That means we are in needs of differentiating our curriculum for gifted learner in this new approach.

However, there is an inevitable trend, a new wave: “This wave is beginning to bring futures methods into schools at all levels, from primary grades through secondary schools and on into undergraduate classes in colleges and universities. (Wheelwright, 2010) Gifted Education should catch this fascinating trend for our high-able learners.

3.      How to put the research to use?

3.1.   Visual Literacy

I list some examples that could be applied for gifted learners from grade 1:

a.      Fun activities:

Some fun activities for introducing visual literacy could include:

- Videoing children pulling faces and interpreting the emotions being displayed.

- Looking at greeting cards and analyse the images, text types and relationship of text to images on and the ‘feel’ created.

- Looking at packaging in the supermarket. Talk about what is real and what is manipulated or created. Look for visual symbols on the packet. Look at Logos and text types used.

- Creating an image resource about a passion the children might have eg a PowerPoint using only images about dinosaurs, netball and so on.

- Creating visual dictionaries. For each letter choose stereotypical images and unusual (non-stereotypical) images. Find images in magazines, newspapers, brochures or online. Encourage children to gather the non-stereotypical images using digital photography.

- Taking digital photographs of the children and using Adobe PhotoShop or Adobe Photoshop Elements to manipulate and change their images. (Bamford, 2003)

b.      Visualization methods “dictionary”:

Visual-Literacy.org has showed the Periodic Table of visualisation methods. This displays over 100 diagram types, with examples and a logical classification.

c.       Artistic activities:

The Visual Thinking Strategies uses art to foster students' capacities to observe, think, listen and communicate.

In VTS discussions teachers support student growth by facilitating discussions of carefully selected works of visual art. 

Teachers are asked to use three open-ended questions:

·         What's going on in this picture?

·         What do you see that makes you say that?

·         What more can we find?

3 Facilitation Techniques:

·         Paraphrase comments neutrally.

·         Point at the area being discussed.

·         Link contrasting and complementary comments.

Students are asked to:

·         Look carefully at works of art.

·         Talk about what they observe.

·         Back up their ideas with evidence.

·         Listen to and consider the views of others.

·         Discuss many possible interpretations.

(Visual Thinking Strategies, 2011)

Building on children's innate capacity to make sense of what they see. Source:http://www.vtshome.org/ 

d.      Online professional development:

Teachers could have more references and resources and even join in free online seminars from “Visual Literacy and Nonlinguistic Representations” (2011), a project which is funded by the National Science Foundation, US.

e.       Examples of curriculum and instruction:

(Moline & Drew, 2011) in their www.k-8visual.info , which “for K–8 classroom teachers who are interested in helping children to read and write information, both print and electronic”  There is several sample lesson plans for reference.

f.       Further reading and practical reference:

            The Learning Network (2010) is also a very diverse resource, especially in using      “infographics” in the classroom.

3.2.   Futurology

a.      Futures (Foresight) Education Project (worldwide):

“The mission of the Futures Education Project therefore is to help teachers teach about the future in their existing courses and to offer stand-alone courses in secondary schools, colleges and professional programs around the world.”  (Bishop, 2011)

b.      Summer Camps for middle school students:

Bishop (2011) on his website also introduces the long-term and strategic plans for foresight education, which has been initiated interestingly as summer camps for middle school students in Houston, USA. 

c.       Enrichment projects for gifted learners:

The 12 sample enrichment projects (see detail in Shostak, 2010) has been introduced impressively: “The first three projects call the attention of youngsters to false claimants, to future-shaping role models, and to future-shaping events in the

year of one’s own birth. The next nine projects involve a wide array of forecasts students should profit from exploring - forecasts I label Solid, Pop Culture, Film, Body-Building, Simulation, Social, Green, IT, and “Way Out.”

d.      Let students joining the competition in the field:

“The Future Problem Solving Program in Australia is a year-long program in which students learn to address complex scientific and social problems of the future through the use of a creative and comprehensive thinking process”.(“Future Problem Solving Program Australia,” n d)


Internationally, founded by creativity pioneer, Dr. E. Paul Torrance, Future Problem Solving Program International (FPSPI) stimulates critical and creative thinking skills, encourages students to develop a vision for the future, and prepares students for leadership roles. FPSPI engages students in creative problem solving within the curriculum and provides competitive opportunities.  Future Problem Solving  Program  International involves thousands of students annually from Australia, Canada, Great Britain, Hong Kong, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, New Zealand, Portugal, Russia, Singapore, and the United States. (Source: http://www.fpspi.org/ )

A Variety Show act at the 2009 Future Problem Solving Program International Conference at Michigan State University, with students from Iowa, Minnesota, and Australia.

REFERENCES

Avgerinou, B. M. D. (2009). Re-Viewing Visual Literacy in the “Bain d’ Images” Era. TechTrends, 53(2), 28-34. doi: 10.1007/s11528-009-0264-z.

Bamford, A. (2003). The Visual Literacy White Paper. Educational Technology. Retrieved from http://www.adobe.com/uk/education/pdf/adobe_visual_literacy_paper.pdf.

Bishop, P. (2011). Foresight Education Project. Retrieved May 14, 2011, from http://foresighteducation.wetpaint.com/.

Borland, J. H. (1989). Planning and implementing programs for the gifted. New York. Teachers College Press.

Davis, G. A., & Rimm, S. B. (2004). Education of the Gifted and Talented. (Fifth Edit., p. 534). Allyn & Bacon.

Future Problem Solving Program Australia. (n.d.). . Retrieved from http://www.fpsp.org.au/.

Gidley, J. M., Batemen, D., & Smith, C. (2004). Futures in Education: Principles, practice and potential. Technology (p. 94). Melbourne: AUSTRALIAN FORESIGHT INSTITUTE.

Howe, A. (1999). A Visual Literacy Strategy - Why not ? Journal of Design & Technology Education, 4(3), 215-222.

Maker, C. J. (1982). Curriculum development for the gifted. Aspen Systems Corp., Rockville, Md.

Mbelani, M., & Murray, S. (2009). Seeing is natural, but viewing is not: teaching visual literacy in a rural classroom. Education as Change, 13(1), 59-71.

Milojević, B. I. (2002). Futures and Utopian thinking in education. Futures of education: Feminist and post-western critiques and visions, PhD Thesis (pp. 85-94). School of Education, The University of Queensland.

Moline, S., & Drew, D. (2011). Visual literacy K-8. Black Cockatoo. Retrieved from http://k-8visual.info/.

NSW Department of Education and Training. (2004). Policy and implementation strategies for the education of gifted and talented students: Support package: Curriculum differentiation. Sydney.

Shoham, S. (2010). Future Intelligence (p. 220). Bertelsman Foundation.

Shostak, A. (2008). Futuristics in K-12 Classrooms. School Administrator, 65(2), 2.

Shostak, A. (2010). Getting Started in Educational Futuristics. Retrieved from http://www.sd25.org/superintendent/opening2010/FuturisticsShostak.pdf.

The Learning Network. (2010). Teaching With Infographics | Places to Start. New York Times. Retrieved from http://learning.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/08/23/teaching-with-infographics-places-to-start/.

VanTassel-Baska, J., & Little, C. A. (2003). Content-Based Curriculum for High-Ability Learners. Prufrock Press.

VanTassel-Baska, J., & Stambaugh, T. (2006). Comprehensive Curriculum for Gifted Learners (3rd ed., p. 432). Allyn & Bacon.

Visual Literacy and Nonlinguistic Representations. (2011). Beyond Penguins and Polar Bears Project ( funded by the National Science Foundation, US). Retrieved from http://wiki.nsdl.org/index.php/BeyondPenguins/Seminars#column-one.

Visual Thinking Strategies. (2011). VTS Facilitation 101. Retrieved May 18, 2011, from http://www.vtshome.org.

Wheelwright, V. (2010). The Next Wave. Journal of Futures Studies, 14(4), 107-114.

Academically Gifted Programs and Services’ Formats – an annotated bibliography

As a practitioner and now being a postgraduate student in this field, I always ask myself that,  how many forms of gifted programs/services? What are the suggestion docs for further understanding of these formats? 

I have answered those questions (particularly, there are at least 70 formats of gifted services/programs) by an assignment in a course named Developing and evaluating programs for intellectually gifted children.

@@@

Introduction and methodology

 Upon writing this paper, I found a book named A Menu of Options For Grouping Gifted Students (Rogers, 2006).  “A menu” is what I would like to discuss for the purpose of this annotated bibliography. It leads me to imagine that in a so-called “gifted education restaurant”, I am helping a school administrator, counsellor, teacher, parent or community leader to choose a variety of appropriate options for their gifted and academically talented child. Before “ordering”, they need a menu: a “mini” encyclopaedia with brief introductions and more references of other gifted services and the formats of their programs. Apparently, they will not order only one dish, but rather a combination of suitable dishes for each gifted child. Moreover, they will require different programs according to their own positions, that will fit more correctly within the home (if they are parents or counsellors), school (if they are administrators or teachers), or community (if they are community leaders or others). I will clarify further about the annotated bibliography’s methodology and structure below.

First, the terms of the paper’s topic must be defined.  NSW Department of Education and Training (2004) cites from Berger (1991) that a program is a “comprehensive, sequential system for educating students with identifiable needs”. In the glossary of  NAGC (National Association for Gifted Children (U.S.), 2010) , it is stated:

Programs/programming: Formally structured, regularly scheduled, ongoing services provided to students with gifts and talents in school or community settings (e.g., museum, laboratory, or university). Programming includes goals, student outcomes, strategies to accomplish them, and procedures for assessing and evaluating these over time. The Committee prefers the term “programming” because it indicates the ongoing nature of these services, while “program” could refer to a one-time event.

From the perspective of our Parents or Community “customers”, the provisions for gifted and talented children are not necessarily “comprehensive” and “formally structured”, rather they could be in various and even “one-time-only” models. This is why I also use the “service” term for this “menu”, as was defined also by NAGC (2010):

Services/servicing: Educational and related interventions that are provided to students in or outside of the regular school setting. A given service may be one-time-only, annual, or ongoing, and may be provided even in the absence of formal gifted programming. Examples may include counselling, tutoring, and mentoring.

Services and programs consist of two important components: curriculum and format (Borland, 1989; Moon & Rosselli, 2000). This annotated bibliography focuses on the “format”, which is described as “the administrative delivery system utilized”  or “the form [of] the delivery of special services to the gifted”. Actually, Borland (1989) asserts the “program format” referring to “take within the school system”. However, as presented above, the term “services” has already been added to our topic to reach a more widened approach)

Second, we identify the structure of this annotated bibliography.  By reviewing the recent works (or very important papers, if they are not recent), we organise our “menu” into four main categories:

Foundation, Framework

Home

School

Community

Figure 1: The Category of Annotated Bibliography “Academically Gifted Programs and Services’ formats”

     
        The first part provides the “must read” list, which answers the questions “Why” (Theories, Models, Practices), “How to do”, “When” (Curriculum, Planning, Implementing, Evaluating, Professional development) and “Who” (Identification). It also includes the general standards, guidelines as well as state-of-the-art reviews of formats of gifted programs and services. 

To answer the questions “What kinds of” and “Where”, the next three parts are three “places”, where the gifted children’s needs are catered. Each place is indicated by an icon (heart, star or sun - in this webpage version, I could not paste that icons, so I only state the words) : “Home”  ; “School” , and “Community” . The “Home” here means mainly within family interactions, such as parenting and home-schooling. The “School” refers to regular school, which young students attend on a daily basis. The “Community” mentions activities which are organised “out-of-school”, such as summer camps, university-based services, or online competitions.

Each item’s brief content review is provided, as well as one or more above icons, labelled according to relevance. There are items which could be in more than one category, which are placed in the most relevant category and labelled with the relevant icon. These items are ordered by the published time. In addition, each “form” or “format” is labelled a number in parentheses to count the total (up to that format) listed in this “menu”.

1.     Foundation, framework

1.1. Handbook; Encyclopedia and up-to-date Reviews of Models and Theories

Mönks, F. J., Sternberg, R. J., & Subotnik, R. F., with Kurt A.Heller. (2000). The international handbook of giftedness and talent (Second., p. 950). Pergamon. (Home; School; Community)

With seven parts and 59 chapters written by over 100 distinguished authors (from 24 nations) in the gifted and talented education field, this international handbook is a worldwide and a comprehensive review of theories and practices. The two largest parts are “Gifted education and programming” and “Examples of country efforts, policies, programs and issues” with 26 chapters, which provide the hands-on formats of gifted programs and services from all over the world.

Colangelo, N., & Davis, G. A. (Eds.). (2003). Handbook of Gifted Education (p.640) (Third Edit.). Allyn & Bacon.  (Home; School; Community)

As one of pioneer handbooks in the field, this third edition provides readers an excellent balance of research and practical applications from well-known gifted education experts. Particularly, the largest section is Part III – Instructional Models and Practices, in which we can see the high level reviews of Enrichment and Acceleration, Curriculum, Grouping and Tracking, Mentoring, Summer and Saturday Programs, Talent Searches.

Pfeiffer, S. I. (2008). Handbook of Giftedness in Children: Psycho-educational Theory, Research, and Best Practices (p. 420). Springer.  (Home; School; Community)

A thorough picture of the field, with 32 leading experts and their 20  areas of expertise, from History to the current Conceptions, from Family of the gifted learners to Federal and State policies, from Identification and nurturing (with international views) to counselling, setting appropriate curriculum, in both a psychological and educational approach. It is a comprehensive and contemporary resource for parents, practitioners and researchers.

Kerr, B. (2009). Encyclopedia of Giftedness, Creativity, and Talent. (B. Kerr, Ed.) (p. 1112). Sage Publications, Inc.           (Home; School; Community)

With two volumes and over 1000 pages, spreading 411 entries through more than 550,000 words, this Encyclopaedia is a must-have for any school, community or dedicated family in gifted education. It is the work of 21 editors and hundreds of contributors who are both the eminent scholars in the field, providing a state-of-the-art “dictionary” by A to Z entries list. Furthermore, there is a reader guide which is based on the well-organised topics. For example, under Programs and Interventions, we could see variety of sub-topics, such as Acceleration options, Coaching, Summer Camps and Talent Searches, with a list of most outstanding gifted centres that run these programs in all over the United States.

Shavinina, L. (Ed.). (2009). International Handbook on Giftedness. (p. 1542). Springer.           (Home; School; Community)

 This handbook is both thoughtful, and the thickest handbook in the field, with 1542 pages and 73 chapters. It not only states systematically regular topics in gifted and talented education, the handbook brings us the discussion of new gifted and talented domains such as computer technology talent (Chapter 37), entrepreneurs giftedness (Chapter 36), and talent and giftedness in cinema (Chapter 33). In addition, the up-to-date formats and practices, especially with technology support, also are explored. For instance, there are Future Problem Solving in Gifted Education ( Chapter 55), - Recent Developments in Technology Implications for Gifted Education (Chapter 56) , High Intellectual and Creative Educational Multimedia Technologies for the Gifted(Chapter 57) The Iowa Online Advanced Placement Academy (Chapter 59). Furthermore, a wide range of international practices have been reviewed, from Asia to South America, Europe, Africa and Middle East.

1.2.   Standard, guidelines

NSW Department of Education and Training. (2004). What are the options? Extension programs for gifted and talented students in comprehensive schools. (School)

To discuss in a critical view the foundation of the document “Policy and implementation strategies for the education of gifted and talented students” (revised 2004), points out the goals of extension programs, being acceleration, flexible grouping options, differentiation of the curriculum: enrichment and extension, and counselling. To keep on the track of general understanding, a system overview and outline of theory, model, characteristics and identification are presented comprehensively. After setting this foundation, the formats of gifted and talented programs in the schools are introduced with clear descriptions, examples and cases. A practical guide finally is expressed for school level and key learning area level with ongoing support from regional and state offices. This is truly a thoughtful and hands-on guidebook for administrators and teachers in gifted education.

National Association for Gifted Children (U.S.). (2010). NAGC Pre-K-Grade 12 Gifted Programming Standards. Education. (School)

Revising from the 1998 edition, this up-to-date paper declares six standards with emphasis on the student outcomes and evidence-based practices. There are: Learning and Development; Assessment; Curriculum Planning and Instruction; Learning Environment; Programming and Professional Development. Applying this standard, the practitioners could do the following tasks in gifted field appropriately: assess, evaluate, and improve local plans and programming • Plan curriculum • Provide professional development • Advocate • Develop, improve, and evaluate state standards • Approve gifted plans and programs and monitor for compliance with state regulations. An official glossary of terms is also provided for consistency in understanding and practicing.

<!        2.     Home

Parenting (1) and Home-schooling (2):

Freeman, J. (2000) Families, the essential context for gifts and talents (pp. 573-585). In: K.A. Heller, F.J. Monks, R. Sternberg & R. Subotnik, International Handbook of Research and Development of Giftedness and Talent. Oxford: Pergamon Press.  (Home; Community)

By scanning a series of works in parenting the gifted in almost 50 years, Freeman points out the main points in the interaction between parents and children as well as individual differences within families. After reviewing several  international researches of “follow-up” studies, the author also consults “good parenting” advice, such as “Teaching skills are needed by parents to develop general and specific areas of their children's potentials” ; “Parents also have to be aware of their own feelings, notably to avoid labels and categories such as gender, in bringing up children who can demonstrate their gifts.”; “ Real emotional support is not quite the same as love: parenting in the name of love can be directive and so inhibit the growth of children's gifts where they are not acceptable. Pride and pleasure in children's accomplishments (or efforts), along with suggestions and encouragement to practice, provide excellent feedback for improving performance.”

Rogers, K. B. (2002). Re-forming gifted education : matching the program to the child (p. xxiii, 504 p.). Scottsdale, AZ: Great Potential Press.   (Home; School; Community)         

As a “must read” and very friendly guide book in the field for parents, this book reviews the forms of gifted programs in a systematic and easy-to-follow appearance.  The unique advantage of this book are useful figures and tables, which parents ( and teachers as well) could use as rich information resources as well as apply for their everyday activities. There are many poignant examples: “The match of gifted characteristics and gifted provisions” (p.90); “Some talent search and other accelerated programs” (with detail addresses, p.130); various “Candidate forms” for the gifted programs and services; full lists of Saturday and Summer Programs (p.332), Good books for gifted Students (p.358), competitions and contests for talent areas (p.362), and so on. Especially, there is a Gifted Education Planner, which is convenient for parents to clarify their child’s strengths, weaknesses as well as learning styles, and set an appropriate educational plan for their gifted child. The invaluable “Shoulds” lists are also provided for both schools and parents in nurturing the children. 

The author also writes a hands-on section named “Homeschooling: A last resort”, where she claims that in the most cases, homeschooling parents do an as well or better job in comparison with public schools. She also provides a rich resource for a home-schooling curriculum, with detail contents/guideline categories. To conclude, she points out that “talent development, as well as interest development and self-awareness, must be the primary thrust of parents’ efforts” and “dexterity, spatial visualization, social problem solving, and memory must also be taught outside of school”.

 Gross, M. U. M. (2004). Exceptionally gifted children (2nd ed., p. 307 p.). London ; New York: RoutledgeFalmer.  (Home; School; Community)          

The author shows an “academic” diary of 15 extraordinary gifted children, whose physical, academic, social and emotional development were traced closely and sensitively in almost 20 years. One would like to understand deeply the truth (and in some cases, very bitter) paths of these profound kids as well as their special needs and the responds from families and schools, one could learn the good examples and the sad stories, so they do not happen to their gifted child. In terms of effective gifted programs for these gifted learners in the research, Gross (2004) concludes that they “have been designed through close cooperation among the school, the parents and the child”. These capable parents understand thoroughly the acceleration, ability grouping and intellectual and emotional needs of their children.

Robinson, A., Shore, B. M., & Enersen, D. L. (2007). Best practices in gifted education : an evidence-based guide (p. xv, 286 p.). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.  (Home; School; Community)          

Throughout research and evidence-based practices, this book provides invaluable advice to administrators, teachers and especially parents of gifted and talented children. The unique point of this book is practical advocating. In each practice, there are two sections: What We Know and What We Can Do, with a concise consultation in separate parts for school,  classroom,home-based activities and parents’ involvement. As a service publication of National Association of Gifted Children (US), this book is a thoughtful menu for setting a great “meal” in nurturing gifted  and talented children.

<!  3.      School

Acceleration: Early Admission to Kindergarten (3); Early Admission to First Grade (4);  Grade-Skipping (5);  Continuous Progress (6); Self-Paced Instruction (7); Subject-Matter Acceleration/Partial Acceleration (8);  Combined Classes (9); Curriculum Compacting (10);Telescoping Curriculum (11);  Mentoring (12); Extracurricular Programs  (13); Correspondence Courses (14); Early Graduation (15); Concurrent/Dual Enrollment (16); Advanced Placement (17); Credit by Examination (18); Acceleration in College (19); Early Entrance into Middle School, High School, or College(20) (based on Southern & Jones, 2004)

Colangelo, N., Assouline, S. G., & Gross, M. U. M. (Eds.). (2004). A nation deceived: How schools hold back Americaʼs brightest students. Connie Belin & Jacqueline N. Blank International Center for Gifted Education and Talent Development, University of Iowa.     (School)       

One cannot approach the holistic database of acceleration without reading this thoughtful work. This 2 –volume of international acceleration advocacy (even its title and content are based mainly on the United States’ circumstance) has been translated into nine different languages. It has been distributed free online through a resourceful website, leading to a new wave of meaningful efforts to support acceleration in worldwide schools.

Volume 1 consists of exposing “a national scandal”, the ignorance of excellence. It also introduces several types of acceleration with brief analysis of each type, through social, economic and academic perspectives. It raises a strong voice with a simple and straight tone, which as they assert, t “every sentence in this volume is culled from the research of America’s leading education experts” (Colangelo, Assouline, & Gross, 2004, Vol I p.53) Apendix F provides a resourceful list of centres, competitions, materials, organizations, programs relating to acceleration and gifted education in general.

Volume 2 supports the acceleration advocacy through 11 chapters of detail research-based discussions by the eminent scholars in the field. As cited above, it is the first time a wide range of 18 forms of acceleration has been reviewed and listed . Furthermore, a various approaches of acceleration, such as “Public policy”, “Meta-analytic studies’’, “Long-term effects”, “Whole-grade”, “Radical”, and “Twice-Exceptional’. For further reading and to be further persuaded, one could read Appendix C – An annotated bibliography on acceleration (Colangelo et al., 2004, Vol II p.129), with 263 references in 12 different categories.

The  exceptional sections of this useful material are the outstanding arguments of the stereotypes, with a practical application. Particularly, there is one attached leaflet to the volumes with straight messages: “Some prejudice points and their counterpoints”, “Some types of acceleration”, “What do accelerated students contribute to society?”, “What teachers can do?”. In the Appendix G of Volume I – What you can do right now, the authors point out specific steps for raising awareness and choose “not to hold back our brightest students”.

 

Grouping: Special schools for the gifted (21);  School within a school (22); Self-contained classes (23); Multi-tracked programs (24); Pull-out programs (25); Resource room programs (26); Provisions within the regular classroom (27) International Baccalaureate Program (28); Individual Education Programs (IEP) (29); Regrouping by ability/achievement level for specific instruction (30); Cluster  grouping by ability/performance (31); Within-class/flexible grouping (32); Like-performing/Like-ability cooperative learning (33); Cross-grade/multi-age grouping (34); Peer tutoring dyads (35). (Based on Rogers (2002, 2006), Davis and Rimm (2004) , Shaunessy and Suldo (2010))

Rogers, K. B. (2006). A menu of options for grouping gifted students. Prufrock Press.          (Home; School)

Generally, Rogers divides grouping into two categories: one by the gifted children’s ability and the other based on their performance. According to her, there are four forms of ability grouping: full-time ability grouping, cluster grouping, pull-out enrichment groups and like-ability cooperative groups;     as well as six forms of performance grouping: regrouping by achievement level for specific instruction,  cluster  grouping by performance, within-class/flexible grouping ,  like-performing cooperative learning ,  cross-grade/multi-age grouping and resource room pull-out enrichment clusters. This method of classification is different from her previous works, , where she describes by the size of group, “whole class” and “small group strategies”.

Using the “menu” concept, the author starts this short and practical guidebook by two cases, which are catered by integrated options of grouping forms in their development path. Afterward, she clarifies 10 forms of grouping, in companion with researches’ evidence. The unique and most practical part of this book is “Selecting and implementing the best forms of grouping for a school”, where she analyses three main factors: administration, teacher and curricula. She makes two concise and useful tables, which advise: (1) regular teacher role, (2) gifted resource teacher role, (3) Content/knowledge to be acquired and (4) skills to be developed. This tool is very convenient to the administrators and teachers in setting curricula and implementing these programs.

Enrichment: Independent study (36); Scientific Research(37); Learning Centres(38); Art Projects(39); Fieldtrips /Excursions/Exchange (40), Peers of Cross-Aged Mentorship (with broad and/or deep knowledge) (41), Distinction Courses (42); Talent Exhibition (43); Lecture (44); Discussion (45); Mini courses (46); Creative Problem Solving (47) (based on Davis and Rimm (2004), Rogers ( 2002),  Colangelo and Davis (2002))

Davis, G., & Rimm, S. (2004). Enrichment and grouping. Education of the gifted and talented (Fifth., pp. 139-164). Allyn & Bacon.  (Home; School; Community)       

In this chapter, the authors point out that both enrichment and acceleration require grouping. On the other hand,  Gross (2003)  asserts that rather than debating "acceleration versus enrichment", we let them stand as vis-à-vis interaction. That means I am classifying for visual-aid effect of a “restaurant” menu, in which some forms could be combined or compounded (with “ingredient”, certainly) to serve our gifted children.

If Rogers (2002) directs mainly the methodology and principle of enrichment activities in her section of “enrichment”. Davis and Rimm (2004) show both “higher order” objectives and specific practices in detail. The authors stress 10 objectives, however in my opinion there are three powerful goals for these enrichment programs: “maximum achievement in basic skills, based on needs, not age”; “content and resources beyond the prescribed curriculum”; “higher-level thinking skills, critical thinking, library and research skills”. After that they review thoroughly 11 strategies/practices of enrichment programs, which were placed above in the list of the programs, as well as placed in the “Community” section, as with  my method of classification.

Counselling: Psychosocial needs counselling (48), Academic counselling (49); Career Counselling(50) (based on Davis and Rimm (2004); VanTassel-Baska (1998))

Davis, G., & Rimm, S. (2004). Understanding and counseling gifted students. Education of the gifted and talented (pp. 425-451). Allyn & Bacon.    (Home; School; Community)     

Stating a “general rule” that “the greater the gift, the greater the counselling need”, the authors establish two clear steps: Firstly, to understand the “unique personal and educational problems of gifted students.” Secondly, once understanding, the next goal of counselling functions “can be carried out by teachers, counsellors, parents, or others.” After re-identifying the gifted and talented children’s characteristics, the authors review literature in the field in the areas concerned, such as Gifted and gay, suicide, career guidance, stress management. The most poignant and practical part of this chapter is “Developing a counselling program for gifted students”, in which the authors clarify the role of each stakeholder: Administrator; Teacher; Counsellor and Parents. From my point of view, the role of the child’s peers could be also highly important  in many special cases, such as when the gifted children would only believe and share their problems with their same-age friends. For solving and helping three needs of gifted learners: Psychosocial Needs Counselling, Academic Counselling; Career Counselling; the authors set up three parallel strategy packages for teachers and counsellors.

<!4.     Community

Out-of-school: Weekend (Saturday) Programs (51); Summer Programs (52); Competitions/Contests for talent areas (53); Tutorial and correspondence programs (54); Social actions and service projects (55); Parents association activities/self-help groups (56); University/College- based programs (57); Future Problem Solving (58); Odyssey of the mind (59); Junior great books (60); Tournament of Minds (61); Mentorship (in community) (62); After-3-hours activities (63); Interests of Faith Youth activities (64); Children Palace (65); Open access centres(66); Talent Searches(67); Zoo/Park/Gallery/Library/Museum/Sport Centres courses (68); Online courses(69); Research Projects with Scientist(70) ( Based on Mönks, Sternberg and Subotnik (2000);  Davis and Rimm (2004); Rogers (2002); Kerr (2009); Freeman (2002); Freeman, Raffan and Warwick (2010))

I have been co-organizing a Sunday-program for young gifted learners in Hanoi, Vietnam (www.thapsangtritueviet.vn)

Freeman, J. (2002). Out-of-school educational provision for the gifted and talented around the world. London.       (Home; School; Community)    

This comprehensive 2-part report (from the Department of Education and Skills, UK) is an extremely detailed and globally appreciated paper in the out-of-school area of the gifted and talented field.  Reviewing nearly 50 countries from continent to continent, the author shows a big picture of services and programs, including their formats, which provide an out-of-school setting. The report then moves from describing to comparing, summarising and analysing talent searches in the US, Germany, Australia and Spain; the Children Palaces throughout China; Saturday activities in South Africa; Gifted and Talented centres in Brazil, Canada; competitions in Russia, just to name a few. Because of these various models and practices, the author uses part two to come to overall conclusions, such as British-American comparisons; practical challenges; international variation, and so on. Especially, she asserts the sharp and thoughtful recommendations with a multi-dimension view - For Selection: Broad conception, Multiple criteria, Vocational Creativity. For Provision: Standards, Flexibility, Individuality, Accessibility, and Emotion. For Following on: Networks, Evaluation. Her outlook is worth-while for any policy makers, parents, practitioners or researchers in the field, to think thoroughly and to apply practically:

“Without a policy for high-level provision at an administrative level, there will inevitably be a lack of consistency. The value of out-of-school education is diminished when it is independent of the child’s schooling. What is more, children need to have good learning year every year, and all through the year. Even for the gifted and talented, a piecemeal top-up from time to time is less likely to be effective than continuing tuition, mentoring etc. Hence, whatever the out-of-school activity, it should be followed-up where possible within the pupil’s normal life.” (Freeman, 2002, p.54)

Conclusion

This annotated bibliography brings the overviews in parallel with necessary references of 70 formats of gifted programs and services. However, categorising the programs and services’ formats has never been the absolute solution, as we see below:

All over the world, virtually every programme for the gifted and talented overlaps and interacts with local educational systems, sometimes with international contacts such as competitions and web-site cooperative lists, sometimes with part-time enrichment, as well as summer-schools, and almost all supported by parental involvement. (Freeman, 2002)

It also points out that to cater the child’s need in gifted education, a “teamwork” between Home, School and Community should be established for a “multi-touch” approach. This cooperation will build a friendly and appropriate environment for nurturing that bright bud.

Furthermore, more time should be spent on “what these learners will actually do” than “what form” “is to be selected” (Rogers, 2006). This idea links to that of a “restaurant” of “raw food”, or a fresh food store, where we show a variety of choices for parents, teachers, administrators, community leaders, counsellors and other interested people. After selecting, they will combine these options together, prepare the ingredient, then “cook” to serve their gifted children individually, based on their different needs and characteristics. Hence, presenting the list of formats in gifted programs and services is just the first step of a holistic strategy in nurturing a gifted child. These include (but are not limited to): Choosing a theory/model/framework; identification; planning, implementation, assessment and evaluation of those options of formats. The annotated bibliographies of these related topics should be made or found for further understanding the whole process. 

REFERENCES

Borland, J. H. (1989). Planning and implementing programs for the gifted. New York. Teachers College Press.

Colangelo, N., Assouline, S. G., & Gross, M U M (Eds.). (2004). A nation deceived: How schools hold back Americaʼs brightest students. Connie Belin & Jacqueline N. Blank International Center for Gifted Education and Talent Development, University of Iowa.

Colangelo, N., & Davis, G A. (2002). Handbook on Gifted Education. Allyn & Bacon.

Davis, G. A., & Rimm, S. B. (2004). Education of the Gifted and Talented. (Fifth Edit., p. 534). Allyn & Bacon.

Davis, G., & Rimm, S. (2004). Education of the gifted and talented (5th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Freeman, J. (2002). Out-of-school educational provision for the gifted and talented around the world.  London.

Freeman, J., Raffan, J., & Warwick, I. (2010). Worldwide provision to develop gifts and talents - an international survey research report.

Gross, M. (2003). International perspectives. In Nicholas Colangelo & G. Davis (Eds.), Handbook of Gifted Education (pp. 547-557). Allyn & Bacon.

Gross, Miraca U M. (2004). Exceptionally gifted children (2nd ed., p. 307 p.). London ; New York: RoutledgeFalmer.

Kerr, B. (2009). Encyclopedia of Giftedness, Creativity, and Talent. (B. Kerr, Ed.)Cognitive Development (p. 1112). Sage Publications, Inc. 

M.Moon, S., & C.Rosselli, H. (2000). Developing gifted programs. International Handbook of Giftedness and Talent (pp. 499-521). Elsevier Inc.

Mönks, F. J., Sternberg, R. J., & Subotnik, R. F., with Kurt A.Heller. (2000). The international handbook of giftedness and talent (Second., p. 950). Pergamon.

National Association for Gifted Children (U.S.). (2010). NAGC Pre-K-Grade 12 Gifted Programming Standards.

NSW Department of Education and Training. (2004). What are the options? Extension programs for gifted and talented students in comprehensive schools.

Rogers, K. B. (2002). Re-forming gifted education : matching the program to the child (p. xxiii, 504 p.). Scottsdale, AZ: Great Potential Press.

Rogers, K. B. (2006). A menu of options for grouping gifted students. Prufrock Press.

Shaunessy, E., & Suldo, S. M. (2010). Strategies Used by Intellectually Gifted Students to Cope With Stress During Their Participation in a High School International Baccalaureate Program. Gifted Child Quarterly, 54(2), 127-137. doi: 10.1177/0016986209355977.

Southern, W. T., & Jones, E. D. (2004). Types of Acceleration: Dimensions and Issues. In N Colangelo, S. G. Assouline, & M U M Gross (Eds.), A Nation Deceived: How schools hold back Americaʼs brightest students (pp. 5-12). Connie Belin & Jacqueline N. Blank International Center for Gifted Education and Talent Development, University of Iowa.

VanTassel-Baska, J. (1998). Excellence in educating gifted & talented learners. Love Publishing Company.