EducationNews.org

Michael F. Shaughnessy
Senior Columnist EducationNews.org
Eastern New Mexico University

1. Maurice, you have recently edited the latest edition of Gifted Education Press Quarterly. Could you give us an overview of some of the latest articles?

As with our previous issues, the Spring 2008 issue continues to present a stimulating array of thought provoking ideas by a diverse group of educators of the gifted and professors. It addresses the following topics:

a. The effective use of cluster grouping to educate gifted students in the regular classroom by Susan Winebrenner and Dr. Dina Brulles.

b. An excellent summary of research on the impact of test bias upon the identification of minority students for gifted education programs, and recommendations for improving the identification of gifted minority students. This article was written by Dr. Gilman W. Whiting of Vanderbilt University.

c. The value of encouraging gifted students' appreciation of the fine arts by Dr. Jason A. Helferand Dr. Stephen T. Schroth of Knox College.

d. Using monologues and scenes to teach gifted children about Shakespeare's plays by Dr. Douglas King of Gannon University.

e. Essay on John Grisham, his books and his giftedness by Dr. Michael E. Walters of the Center for the Study of the Humanities in the Schools.

All of these authors are very knowledgeable about their subject areas and highly dedicated to improving the education situation for gifted students.

For example, Susan Winebrenner has presented hundreds of workshops across the nation on how to design effective differentiated programs within the context of the regular classroom. I have known Susan for many years and am impressed with her positive impact on the gifted education field. Dina Brulles is a coordinator of gifted education for the Paradise Valley Unified School District in Phoenix, Arizona.

Gilman Whiting is one of the most knowledgeable young scholars in the gifted field. He has written previous articles for Gifted Education Press Quarterly which demonstrate his wide range of understanding of the research literature on student assessment, teaching minority students and gifted education. Jason Helfer and his colleague, Stephen Schroth, are developing important concepts for educating gifted students in the arts and humanities.

The work by Douglas King also addresses an important humanities topic – how to teach Shakespeare to young gifted students. I believe King's article is one of the best resources on this topic because he brings in his extensive experience in performing Shakespeare's plays and shows how he trains gifted children to take control of their stage performance. The final author included in the Spring 2008 issue of GEPQ is Michael Walters.

He has written many outstanding articles for my publications during the last twenty years which address issues of teaching the humanities to gifted students. Humanities education for the gifted is a neglected area in the public schools and I will continue to publish articles on this topic.

2. What seems to be happening in the gifted education field?

The fight for survival in these poor economic times seems to be the major thrust of gifted education program leaders. Almost every day, I read newspaper articles discussing gifted education programs that have been cut or will receive reduced funding.

I also understand that the state of Illinois has again eliminated funding for gifted education because of massive reductions in the overall state education budget.

Some positive movements in the education of gifted students are concerned with developing more systematic procedures for identifying gifted minority students, providing more learning opportunities for students with exceptional abilities in mathematics and the sciences, and providing challenging online learning services for gifted students.

I am amazed by the mathematical and scientific talent that continues to emerge from national competitions such as the Siemens Westinghouse Science and Technology Competition. In addition, there are many outstanding public and private programs for these students at the local, state and national levels.

The one I am particularly impressed with is sponsored by the Center for Excellence in Education (CEE) under the direction of Joann P. DiGennaro. This Center, located in McLean, Virginia, was originally founded by Admiral Hyman Rickover and Ms. DiGennaro in 1983. CEE manages the USA Biology Olympiad which competes in the International Biology Olympiad. In 2007, the four-member USA team received a gold medal and was designated "Number One Team in the World" by winning against 48 nations.

Through its summer programs (The Research Science Institute in collaboration with the Massachusetts Institute of Technology), CEE has nurtured some outstanding genius-level talent through the years. As an example, Terence Tao was a young student when he first attended CEE summer programs. In 2006, at 31 years he was awarded the prestigious Fields Medal in mathematics which is equivalent to a Nobel Prize. Tao is now a professor of mathematics at UCLA.

This nation has many gifted students who are extremely capable in mathematics and science. This is why I question the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) which places American students far below other nations. Something is conceptually wrong here with the student selection process.

I know Gerald Bracey has launched many criticisms of the methodology used to conduct this international study, and I agree with him that "Something is rotten in the state of Denmark."

First, the USA students are being primarily compared to small homogeneous nations such as the Netherlands, Latvia, Hong Kong and Belgium. Second, there seems to be no statistical control for socio-economic class factors when making these nation-by-nation comparisons. Of course, our illustrious mainstream press immediately pounces upon these clearly biased results and says, "See, we told you so….American schools continue to lag behind Latvian, Swedish, etc. school systems in mathematics and science."

I don't believe these TIMSS comparisons are completely useless but the American public and educators should examine them more critically, and not be influenced by the press. Get ready for the 2007 TIMMS results to be released in December 2008.

3. What kinds of topics are being researched?

There are few systematic research programs that I have observed from reading the major journals in the gifted education field. Most research articles in these journals are driven by current interests of major professors and their graduate students, or by specific models or theories of interest to certain professors.This situation is very sad because it provides little support to educators on the firing line of public and private schools.

Our schools need lots of research and program evaluations to help in determining what gifted programs work and which ones are ineffective; how to identify and teach gifted minority students, mathematically talented students and exceptional students in science; how to present a strong content-based curriculum to the gifted; and how to provide a comprehensive education for all gifted students in the humanities, arts, science and mathematics. Unfortunately, I don't see the research literature addressing these issues in a comprehensive and systematic manner.

Some educators might argue that if we had more funds from the federal and state governments, we could do a better job in this respect. However, I don't think that lack of money is the main issue. Rather it appears to be a matter of first establishing a research agenda for the gifted education field that will incorporate the thinking of all concerned parties who would provide input on an equal footing, i.e., school district personnel, state level program managers and university professors.

The professorial-level, titular heads of the gifted field need to work on an equal basis with school level educators to design a viable research agenda. The national gifted organization (National Association for Gifted Children-NAGC) clearly has an important role to play here, but I've been waiting for years to see what it will do in this and many other areas – so far, I've been very disappointed.

4. In your mind, who is doing most of the cutting edge research?

I'm not sure what cutting edge research would be like at this point in the gifted education field. I have always been impressed with the research on mathematically talented students conducted by the Johns Hopkins group and the Talent Identification Programs at Northwestern and Duke Universities.These programs have implemented rigorous research on the characteristics of mathematically talented students, and have used standardized test results to document progress.

The work of Johns Hopkins, et al. researchers should serve as a model for the entire gifted field.

I am particularly impressed with Professor Donna Ford and her colleagues at Vanderbilt University in writing comprehensive literature reviews and conceptual articles on issues of identifying and educating gifted minority students. Ford, et al. are outstanding scholars who have a deep understanding of the vast literature in the education, psychology and sociology of minority students in 21^st Century America.

I have published several articles by these individuals and look forward to working with them in the future.

5. In your mind, what issues still need to be explored?

I would like to see more interest in setting up a comprehensive curriculum that emphasizes the humanities, arts, mathematics and science.This is a major priority because such a curriculum would challenge gifted students to move beyond the state mandated multiple-choice test curriculum which is currently in vogue. It would also help them to see the many possibilities that such a curriculum offers for their career and professional development.

It would be necessary to set up a rigorous longitudinal study to follow up gifted students who participate in this curriculum (with appropriate tests, surveys and other assessments) from the primary grades through middle school, high school and college. Where are the resources for conducting such a study? Perhaps the United States Congress, in its great wisdom, should mandate this type of research.

6. Do you have special theme issues planned for this summer?

Gifted Education Press Quarterly does not follow a particular theme. Instead, I have been more concerned with identifying articles by excellent and knowledgeable writers on a wide variety of topics. My readers appear to like this approach because I constantly receive positive feedback on the quality and helpfulness of the articles.

Two of the articles that will appear in the Summer 2008 issue are concerned with:

(1) instructional strategies that support gifted students' appreciation of the fine arts; and (2) ways to support the work of highly productive gifted students.

7. Where can readers get information or a sample copy?

They should email me at GEPQ@comcast.net with their request. There are currently about 14,000 online subscribers, and I wholeheartedly welcome many more. From my experience, there are large numbers of educators and parents across the nation who would like to improve the education of gifted students.

8. Do you have a web site where readers can get more information?

Yes, Gifted Education Press has an active web site which presents extensive information about Gifted Education Press Quarterly, Gifted Education News-Page, and our many books in science, mathematics and the humanities. Readers can view this web site by clicking, www.GiftedEdPress.com.

Thank you for this interview, and best of success to you and all parents and educators who want to obtain the best possible education for gifted students.

Published April 10, 2008