Classroom Teachers: It Matters What They Know About Gifted Education Matters

Dr. Julie Lamb-Milligan

doi:10.31686/ijier.vol7.iss12.2031

Authors

Dr. Julie Lamb-Milligan a:1:{s:5:"en_US";s:25:"Arkansas State University";}

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.31686/ijier.vol7.iss12.2031

Keywords:

Gifted Education, Identification, Modifications, Staff Development, Classroom Teachers, Inservice

Abstract

Classroom teachers are one of the most important stakeholders in the ultimate success of programs for the gifted. These teachers are responsible for recognizing potential giftedness and nominating those students for services. In most instances, they are responsible for assisting specialists with planning and making modifications in the regular classroom to accommodate the learning needs of the gifted. This paper addresses concerns regarding the lack of classroom teachers’ knowledge of giftedness when there is a lack of training and support offered to them. It also addresses many positive effects and results from classroom teachers’ involvement in staff development which heightens their awareness of giftedness. A review of literature and interviews with classroom teachers are used to heighten awareness among specialists in gifted education and emphasize their responsibility toward assisting other educators in matters related to gifted education.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Bangel, N. J., Enersen, D., Capobianco, B., & Moon, S. M. (2006). Professional
development of preservice teachers: Teaching in the super Saturday program. Journal for the Education of the Gifted. 29(3), 339-361.
Bigelow, 1993; Bigelow, R. (1993). Developing and implementing a program to
improve school success for minority students. Nova University: Practicum
Report. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 365 007)
Bransky, T. (1987). Specific program information: A key to attitudes
about the gifted education. Gifted Child Quarterly, 31(1), 29-32.
Coleman, M. R., & Gallagher, J. (1995). State identification policies: Gifted students
from special populations. Roeper Review, 17(4), 268-275.
Hertzog, C., & Robinson, A. E. (2005). Metacognition and intelligence. In O. Wilhelm
& R. W. Engle (Eds.) Understanding and measuring intelligence. London: Sage, 101-123.Hertzog, 2005;
Hickey 1990; Hickey, M. G. (1990). Classroom teachers’ concerns and
recommendations for improvement of gifted programs, Roeper Review, 12(4),
265-267.
Miller, B. S. (1981). Gifted children and their families. In B. S. Miller & M. Price
(Eds.),The gifted child, the family, and the community. New York: Walker & Co.
Milligan (2001) Milligan, J. (2001). Effective staff development in a low socio
-economic rural setting: A microethnography of teacher’s perceptions of giftedness: (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 450 992)
Milligan, J., & Campbell, D. (2003). It’s a fit: Collaboration and gifted education.
Understanding Our Gifted, 15(3), 18-21.
Nelson, R., & McCann, C. (1989). The at-risk student. Publication for the College of
Education. Conway, AR: University of Central Arkansas.
Pfeiffer, S. I. (2003). Challenges and opportunities for students who are gifted: What the
experts say. The Gifted Child Quarterly, 47(2) p. 161-166.
Smutny, J. F., & Blocksom, R. H. (1990). Education of the gifted. Bloomington, IN:
Phi Delta Kappa Educational Foundation.
Starko, A. J. (1990). Life and death of a gifted program: Lessons not yet learned.
Roeper Review, 13(1), 33-38.
Tomlinson, C. (2001). Differentiated instruction in the regular classroom:
What does it mean? How does it look? Understanding Our Gifted, 14(1), 3-6.
VanTassel-Baska, (2006) Serving Gifted Learners Beyond the Traditional Classroom: A
Guide to Alternative Programs and Services, Prufrock Press, Waco, TX.