Perception of the Scientifically Gifted and Long-term Effects of Science Gifted Education Program - from the Students' Perspectives |
Chun, Mi-Ran
(BK21 SENS)
Shin, Yoon-Joo (Department of Science Education, Seoul National University) Lee, Sung-Muk (Department of Science Education, Seoul National University) Choe, Seung-Urn (Department of Science Education, Seoul National University) |
1 | Callahan, C. M.(1992). Determining the effectiveness of educational services: Assessment issues. In Challenges in gifted education: Developing potential and investing in knowledge for the 21st century(pp. 109-114). Columbus Ohio State Department of Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED301131) |
2 | Feldhusen, J. E. (1985). Toward excellence in Gifted Education. Denver, Colorado: Love Publishing Co. |
3 | Fetterman, D. M. (1993). Evaluate yourself. Storrs, CT: National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented |
4 | Avery, L. D., VanTassel-Baska, J., & O'Neill, B.(1997). Making evaluation work: One school district's experience. Gifted Child Quarterly, 41(4), 124-132 DOI |
5 | Landrum, M. S.(2001). An evaluation of the catalyst program: Consultation and collaboration in gifted education. Gifted Child Quarterly, 45(2), 139-151 DOI |
6 | Bogdan, R., & Biklen, S. K.(2006). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theories and methods. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon |
7 | Borland, J. H. (1997). Evaluating gifted programs. In N. Colangelo & G. A. Davis (2nd Eds.), Handbook of gifted education (pp. 253-268). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon |
8 | Callahan, C. M.(2004). Program evaluation in gifted education. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press |
9 | Greene, J.(1994). Qualitative program evaluation: Practice and promise. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 530-544). Thousand Oaks. CA: Sage |
10 | Feng, A. X., & VanTassel-Baska, J. (2003). Designing and utilizing evaluation forgifted program improvement. Waco, TX: Prufrock Press Co. |
11 | Sapon-Shevin, M.(1993). Gifted education and the protection of privilege: Breakin the silence, opening the discourse. In L. Weiss & M. Fine(Eds.), Beyond silenced voices(pp. 45-73). Albany: State University of New York Press |
12 | Swiatek, M. A., & Benbow, C. P. (1991). Ten-year longitudinal follow-up of ability matched accelerated and unaccelerated gifted students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 3, 528-538 |
13 | Borland, J. H. (1989). Planning and implementing programs for the gifted. New York: Teachers College Press, Columbia University |
14 | Coleman, J., & Fults, B. (1985). Self-concept and the gifted classroom: The role of social comparisons. Gifted Child Quarterly, 26, 116-120 DOI |
15 | Shore, M. B., Cornell, A. R., & Ward, V. S.(1991). Recommended practices in gifted education: A critical analysis. NY: Teachers College Press |
16 | Tannenbaum, A. (1983). Gifted Children. New York: Macmillan |
17 | Smutny, J. F. (2002). Designing and developing programs for gifted students. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press |
18 | Davalos, R. A., & Haensly, P. A.(1997). After the dust has settled: Youth reflect on their high school mentored research experience. Roeper Review, 19, 204-207 DOI ScienceOn |
19 | Renzulli, J. (1986). Systems and models for developing programs for the giftedand talented. Creative Learning Press |
20 | Treffinger, D. (2004). Enhancing and expanding gifted programs: The levels of service approach. Waco, TX: Prufrock Press Co. |
21 | Kulik, J., & Kulik, C. (1992). Meta-analytic findings on grouping programs. Gifted Child Quarterly, 36, 73-77 DOI |
22 | Lubinski, D., & Benbow, C. P. (1994). The Study of Mathematically Precocious Youth (SMPY): The first three decades of a planned fifty-year longitudinal study of intellectual talent. In R. Subotnik & K. Arnold (Eds.). Beyond Terman: Longitudinal studies in contemporary gifted education (pp. 255-281). Norwood, NJ: Ablex |
23 | Ford, D.(1995). Desegregating gifted education: A need unmet. Journal of Negro Education, 64, 52-60 DOI ScienceOn |
24 | Hertzog, N. B.(2003). Impact of gifted program from the students' perspectives. Gifted Child Quarterly, 47(2), 131-143 DOI |