Bilingualism and the gifted intellect

Teaching young gifted children a second language enriches their ability for linguistic expression.     

Making Sense in Education: Pretense (Including No Child Left Behind) and Realities in Rhetoric and Policy About Schools and Schooling

One wrong assumption about reality is sufficient to ensure the failure of education policy. For a variety of reasons, too many people have ignored realities in policies such as the No Child Left Behind Act. Individuals who are serious about reforming or improving education, general or special, must confront realities in at least the following areas: measurement, statistical distributions, measurement error, labels, special services, teacher responsibilities, and teacher training. Enacting or supporting education policy that is known to be seriously flawed is unacceptable and tantamount to the criminal conduct of someone who markets goods with known safety defects or harmful effects or of someone who ignores critical realities in the conduct of business.     

Mystery to mastery: Shifting paradigms in gifted education

We provide here a brief historical analysis of a movement in progress from a belief‐based “mystery” model to an evidence‐based “mastery” model of giftedness and talent development. We have observed that educators concerned about exceptionally capable learners are moving from a categorical notion of “the typical gifted child” with somewhat mysteriously defined attributes and learning needs, toward the perspective that some children have exceptionally advanced learning needs that require more flexibly responsive educational attention. We discuss factors that differentiate the two models, and observe some benefits of the shifting paradigm, arguing that by conceptualizing gifted education as providing a dynamically responsive educational match for students who otherwise experience a mismatch with the curriculum normally provided, the mastery model is socially, educationally, and politically more defensible. We discuss some practical implications of this shift in perspective.     

Gender studies: some methodological and theoretical issues

In the first part of this paper, studies are reviewed which suggest that gender differences in science achievement can be explained entirely in terms of social factors, and which also suggest that these differences could be eliminated, or even reversed, by changing the social environment. For the studies examined, it is suggested that research workers may not have taken sufficient account of confounding variables in their work, and that the apparent changes in gender differential reported may be explained in terms of these confounding variables.

In the second part of the paper, studies are reviewed which seek explanation of gender differences in science achievement in terms of unequal treatment of boys and girls by science teachers in the classroom. It is concluded that the quality of the research work which has been undertaken is disappointing, and that the research evidence provided by these studies for the differential treatment of boys and girls by science teachers is far from convincing.

It is concluded that real gender differences in science achievement do exist, and that they cannot be explained fully in terms of the social environment. It is suggested that both biological and sociological theoretical perspectives on gender differences in science achievement are inadequate, and that further progress in understanding gender differences in science achievement will require a new theoretical synthesis. It is suggested that sociobiology may provide the required new theoretical synthesis by allowing for the recognition of both biological and environmental influences on science achievement.