..

... ..

2006

..

: ,

: ,

,

... ..

2006

I

......................................................................................................................V ............................................................................................................VIII .. X

-

1 : ................................................................................................................2 2 .......................................................................................................6 2.1. ....................................................6

2.2. ........................................................10

2.3.

........................15

2.4. .................19

3 .............................................................................................................................22 3.1. ...........23

3.1.1. Porter .......................................................................................23

3.1.2. Winner .....................................................................................25

3.2. .......................................................28

3.2.1. ......................................................31

II

4 .........................................................................................................................36 4.1.

..................................................................................................................40

4.2. .............................46

4.3.

.................................................................................................................52

:

5 ..............................................................................................................65 5.1. ..................................................65

5.2. .....................................................................................................................66

5.3. .............................................................................................72

5.4. ...........................................................................74

5.5. ................................................................................................75

6 ..........................................................................................................77 6.1. ......................................................................................82

6.1.1. - : .......... .........................83

6.1.2. - : .....................85

6.1.3. - : ............88

6.1.4. - : ..................90

6.1.5. : ..................... ................92

6.1.6. : .......................94

6.1.7. : ..............96

6.1.8. : ...................98

6.1.9. ........100

6.1.10. ..........104

III

7 - ........................................................110 8 .........................................................................127 8.1. ....................................................................................................127

8.2. ............................................................129

...........................................................................................................137 : .1 Cronbachs Alpha (SRBCSS) B / .2 Cronbachs Alpha (SRBCSS) B / .3 Cronbachs Alpha (SRBCSS) / .4 Cronbachs Alpha (SRBCSS) / .5 Cronbachs Alpha (SRBCSS + 17 ) B / .6 Cronbachs Alpha (SRBCSS + 17 ) / .7 Cronbachs Alpha (SRBCSS + 17 ) B / .8 Cronbachs Alpha (SRBCSS + 17 ) / .9 () .10 () .1

IV

.1 t (Independent Samples t test) .2 t (Independent Samples t test) .3 t (Independent Samples t test) .4 t (Independent Samples t test) .5 t (Independent Samples t test) .6 t (Independent Samples t test) .7 t (Independent Samples t test) .8 t (Independent Samples t test) .9 (Cronbachs Alpha) ( ) .10 (Cronbachs Alpha) B ( )

V

M 21

,

.

,

.

.

,

,

,

.

15,

. ,

UNESCO, UNICEF, ...,

.. -

.

,

, ,

,

.

VI

, , ,

, .

,

.

.

,

.

,

. ,

. ,

,

, , ,

.

,

,

,

.

,

,

, .

,

VII

,

.

,

. ,

,

,

. , ,

/ .

. ,

, .

, ,

, , ,

, ..

-,

,

.

:

, , ,

,

.

, , ,

,

.

VIII

, , , ,

.

, .

,

. -

, ,

,

.

,

.

.

,

.

.

, , .

, ...

.. ,

.

, ... ..,

, .

IX

Joseph S

Renzulli,

T (NRCGT) E

T Connecticut Sally Reiss,

Connecticut

CONFRATUTE

(NRCGT)

Connecticut, . , ,

Taisir Subhi Yamin, Arabian Gulf University

(WCGTC), Dr. Rena Subotnik,

(APA), Wendy Stewart,

/ St. Ignatius College

(AAEGT)

Jonathan Linton, Lally School of Managenent and Technology, Rensselaer

Polytechnic Institute.

, ,

... .., ,

... .., , ... ..

, .... .. ,

.

... .. ,

,

,

,

,

.

.

, , ,

.

X

.

( 3194/2003 267) 2817/2000,

,

, .

/

.

SRBCSS-R,

.

, 424 / (93

331 ).

.

-

SRBCSS-R.

. ,

.

: -

XI

ABSTRACT

Gifted students special characteristics have not been assessed and elucidated yet. Recent

modifications in our countrys legislation (Law 3194/2003 FEK 267 ) and the special

passage addition in the Law 2817/2003 anticipate special provision to individuals with

special intellectual abilities and talents. This suggests the urgent need for sensitive and

adequately trained teachers on matters concerning the identification and support of their

pupils special educational needs. The present study explores the characteristics of gifted

children in elementary school, based on which, in service and pre service elementary

teachers perceive and describe the gifted student. For the data collection, a questionnaire

was developed based on the well-known, from the bibliography, SRBCSS-R assessment

scale, which was translated into the greek language and was adapted to the greek

standards. After a pilot study, the final research was conducted on 424 participants, all

elementary school teachers, (93 pre service and 331 in service teachers respectively). The

results indicated that there are differences in between pre service and in service teachers

perceptions as regards the gifted student. However, both groups of participants seem to

draw a marginal distinction between the gifted student and the student they perceive as

average-typical on the gifted behavioral dimensions of SRBCSS-R scale as a whole. Both

pre service and in service teachers were found to focus more on learning and motivational

characteristics. On the contrary, the characteristics of creativity and leadership were not

highly valued by the participants on their perceptions of who the gifted student is.

Key-words: Giftedness

Gifted students characteristics

In service teachers perceptions

Pre service teachers perceptions

2

1

:

.

,

(Borko &

Shavelson, 1990). ,

,

. ,

( Lake, 1988 George & Rubin, 1992 ).

. (1944)

,

, (Clark, Dyson, Millward

& Skidmore, 1977).

,

,

, .

,

, -

, ,

(Tomlinson et al., 1995

Clark, 1995).

3

, ,

, ,

(Veenman,1984).

, , ,

,

( Megay-Nespoli, 2001).

, ,

,

.

, ,

,

, ( , 1997).

, ,

. , ,

, , . ,

, ,

, -

,

,

.

(Fuller & Brown,1975

Lidstone & Hollingsworth,1990 Kagan,1992a Berliner,1994).

4

,

, .

, ,

, , ,

.

,

, , ,

, (McDiarmid, 1990

Laboskey, 1994).

.

, ,

,

,

.

.

(- , 1995

, 2004).

, UNESCO, UNISEF, ... ...

UNESCO , 1994 Salamanca

,

.

5

,

,

.

,

(1948)

.

,

,

( , 2002

, 2004).

: , ,

, , .

, o 2817( 1, 6)

: ) )

,

)

) .

, .

,

. ,

,

.

( 3194/2003 267),

2817/2000

..

6

2

2.1

,

,

.

, ,

.

Gallagher (1985)

.

.

16 , 17

19 /

.

,

,

.

, ,

,

.

.

7

Howard Gardner (1983),

.

, -, , ,

- ,

,

.

Gardner (1983)

, Sternberg (1985)

,

(.) .

Sternberg

,

. ,

/ ,

. Sternberg,

( ),

( )

,

,

.

Tannenbaum (1991),

, : 1) ,

2) , 3)

, 4) 5)

.

,

, .

8

,

.

(Renzulli, 1978, 1988 Simonton, 1997Gagne, 1999)

,

.

, ,

,

, ,

. ,

,

20 .

,

.

,

,

.

.

, , ,

, .

(,1999).

. -

9

(.

, ,

) ,

, .

,

/ .

A ,

,

,

(Pendarvis & Howley,1996).

.

- ,

,

, -

(Porter,1999).

, (Webb,

et al., 1991 Bragget,1994 ).

,

Strernberg Davidson (1986, .4) :

, .

.

,

, .

10

, ,

.

.

,

,

.O McAlpine (1996)

: 1) , 2)

( ) 3)

, .

: ,

,

. Sternberg Davidson

(1986),

.

2.2

Roback (1961) Juan Huarte (1530-1589)

1575,

Trial of Wits, Discovering the Great Difference

of Wits Among Men and What Sort of Learning Suits Best With Each Genious.

11

Huarte

. 1860, Francis Galton

(Feldhusen &

Jarwan, 1993).

Guy M.Whipple,

,

( Passow, 1981). ,

,

. Lewis Terman (1926) ,

,

.

, Pritchard (1951), Hollingworth

,

.

.

Sputnik

. Witty (1958)

,

.

, ,

.

Witty, 1962 ..

, ,

.

: 1)

,

12

2)

3) ,

/, (Gallagher,1963).

1967 Guilford 120

(5 4

6 ), (1982) 150.

Guilford,

.

,

, , ,

, ,

(, 1998).

To 1972 ..

.

, ..,

S.P.Marland : ,

, ,

.

, /

,

: 1) , 2)

, 3) , 4) , 5)

() 6) ( Marland, 1972, .10).

,

.

13

1978 J.Renzulli, Connecticut,

.

(he Three-Ring Conception),

Guilford ,

: 1) , 2)

3) .

. Renzulli (1978, .261),

,

.

1984, nks, (1994),

Renzulli, ,

, ,

.

1993,

.

.. : National

Excellence:A case for Developing Americas Talent. ,

Marland,

,

. , :

,

, .

,

/ ,

.

.

( Ross, 1993, .16 ).

14

, ,

.

Feldhusen (1998),

.

,

.

Tannenbaum ,

, Gagne

,

,

(Porter, 1999, .31).

(Corsini,1999)

.

140

.

.

,

,

, Porter (1999) :

.

,

.

15

(Gardner,1983 Bloom,1985 Sternberg, 1985 Renzulli,1986).

,

:

..,

.

.

,

. (Renzulli & Reis, 1997, .8)

2.3

,

, .

,

10%-15% . 2/3

1/3

( 1).

16

, ,

, .

.

,

. , .

., 130,

. 180,

(. . 130).

(Winner, 1996).

, Sternberg (1999)

,

.

.

., Coleman (1995) :

.

17

, , ,

.

/ ,

,

(Renzulli & Reis,1997).

, , ,

( 2).

. ,

/

(Renzulli 1978).

.

2: , -, 1994

18

. ,

, , .

.

(Renzulli & Reis, 1997).

,

.

, , ,

.

, ,

.

.

,

. ,

.

. ( 2004, .422 ),

Keith Cool (1992) :

,

........ ,

......... ......

.

, ,

, , , ,

19

, , ,

,

, .

,

,

, ,

.

,

,

.

. ,

, ,

.

2.4

,

, .

,

,

. ,

,

. ,

.

20

,

.

.

, , ,

.

,

.

(Renzulli & Reis,

1997).

, ( )

.

,

Renzulli

,

(.1).

21

( )

, , ,

. ,

. . ,

.

(.. , , ).

(formal knowledge),

(tacit knowledge), ,

.

.

(- ) , ,

.

, , , .

, ,

.

.

.

,

, , .

, . , (

),, .

, , .

, .

, .

1 :

(Renzulli & Reis,1997 : 9)

22

3

. ,

. .

,

, ,

(Balch,1993).

Terman, 1925,

-

( Flom, 1992). Hollingsworth,

, Terman

,

(Flom, 1992).

Frasier (1995)

1957-1995,

,

.

, .

,

, : , ,

, ,

/, , , ,

.

23

3.1

3.1.1 Porter

Porter (1999, . 74- 76),

,

:

: , ,

, (.

, , ) : ,

/ -

24

: , ,

- : , .

- (-, -) puzzles

: , ,

, : - ,

,

25

3.1.2 Winner

Winner (1996, .27-31)

- ,

, ,

.

,

,

.

, ,

, ..

, 5

:

: ( - ) (), : : ( 4 ) (, ) ( , ,

)

26

: ,

: Winner (1996):

, . T

,

.

,

:

.

.

. ,

. ,

.

, ,

.

, .

. , (1998,

.24-26)

:

27

: , : : : .

: .

28

: , , , , , : : ,

3.2

, Balch (1993) :

,

.

, . ,

,

.

,

. ,

Balch,

.

29

.

,

.

,

(Webb, 1994).

, ,

.

.

,

,

. ,

, ,

. , Dixon

(1996, . 14-15) :

; ; / ; , ; ; ; ; ;

, ,

:

30

;

; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; , ; - ; ; ; , ; ; ; , , ; ; ; ; ; ; ,

. ,

. Dixon, Mains Reeves (1996, .17)

: ,

,

.

,

,

31

3.2.1

. : 1) , 2)

, 3) 4) .

, ,

, ,

, , -,

(Balch, 1993, . 9-10).

, , ,

. ,

, .

,

, , , /

.

, ,

.

, ,

.

,

(Alvino, 1991,.171).

,

.

. Balch (1993)

,

, ,

,

32

.

, ,

.

,

.

.

,

.

.

(Balch,1993).

,

(Dixon et. al, 1996 Flom, 1992).

Dixon, Mains Reeves (1996) 6 : 1)

, 2) , 3) , 4) ,

, 5) 6) .

Flom (1992) ,

Betts Neihart (1986).

: 1) , 2) , 3)

, 4) / , 5)

6) .

Dixon ,

, ,

.

.

.

33

Flom (1992, .12). , ,

, .

: ,

. ,

.

Dixon ,

, .

, .

. ,

. ,

-.

,

, , . Baker ( 1996, .359):

,

,

.

,

-

.

Dixon ,

,

Flom.

,

, -

(Dixon et al,1996, .10).

.

, ,

34

, .

, , Flom,

, ,

,

. Flom,

.

. .

40% ,

, . ,

(Dixon et al.,1996,.11).

Dixon (1996, .12),

.

,

.

. ,

.

.

Flom (1992, .13)

,

, ,

, .

Flom

,

.

35

,

.

, .

,

.

, Flom, .

,

.

.

.

.

.

36

4

. ,

,

. ,

,

.

.

Calderhead (1993) Fullan (1991)

,

(Ashton & Webb, 1986 Feiman, Nemser & Buchmann, 1987 Weinstein,

1989)

,

.

(10 -15%)

. ,

(31,4%)

, .

(, 1999, .112). ,

37

. .

, ,

.

,

,

,

, .

.

,

, , .

. ,

,

, ,

.

,

-

.

, ,

(Hunsaker, Finley & Frank, 1997),

.

,

.

, , , ,

, (Plata & Masten, 1998).

To

,

,

38

, . ,

(Gear, 1976Cohen, 1988).

, Pegnato Birch (1959)

. ,

(oge & Cudmore, 1986

Renzulli & Reis, 1997).

,

,

. ,

,

. ,

(Gagne, 1994).

,

,

.

,

,

.

/

(Kalantan,1991 Chan, 2000

39

& , 2003).

,

. ,

/ ,

,

(Gari et., al., 2000).

,

.

,

.

.

,

. O 20

,

,

(Clark &

Peterson,1986 Shulman, 1987).

.

.

,

.

40

.

,

. Weber (1999)

,

,

.

,

(VanTassel-Baska et al., 2004).

4.1

.

, ,

(Lilly,

1975). Rosenthal Jacobson (1968)

, .

, ,

. ,

Nicely, Small Furman (1980)

.

41

,

.

,

.

,

.

. Cain

(1980) ,

.

,

. ,

,

. Moore Fine (1978) ,

,

. Alexander Strain (1978) ,

.

Jacobs (1972, .2)

,

. :

42

,

, , .

:

,

(.25).

, Rosenthal

Jacobson (1968)

.

30 Jacobs , Rohrer (1995, .280-

281)

,

- ,

,

.

.

(Feldhusen & Hoover, 1984). ,

,

(Yuker, Block & Young, 1970).

H Clark (1984, .132) ,

,

, .

,

Jefferson

. ,

,

43

,

. ,

.

.

. Dardig

(1981, .124)

,

: ,

,

.

Schack Starko (1990)

,

,

.

:

,

, , ,

.

,

/, .

(.358),

,

,

,

/ .

, ,

44

.

,

.. (National

Research Center for the Gifted and Talented, University of Connecticut)

,

(Tomlinson et.al., 1994). ,

,

,

. , ,

,

. ,

,

.

, .

, .

,

. Tomlinson

,

. ,

,

,

,

, .

Ribich, Barone Agostino (1998).

video

, ,

45

,

.

,

. 14

(Clinkenbeard, 1991)

. ,

, .

Worrel, Szarko Gabelko (2001)

,

-

,

.

, ,

, .

Ford (1995), ,

152 -,

, Virginia.

()

. Ford (1996),

,

.

46

4.2

,

.

(Chitwood, 1986).

(Lazow &

Nelson, 1974).

Smutny (1994)

.

Denver Colorado,

66%

(Chitwood, 1986).

-

.

(Smith & Zarate,1992).

(Kolb & Jussim, 1994).

, ,

(Donovan & Cross, 2002).

/

(Coleman & Gallagher,1995)

47

(Kanevsky, 2000).

,

,

.

,

(Ford, Harris, Tyson & Trotman,

2002).

,

,

(Bernai, 2000).

, ,

,

, , ,

Sternberg (1985 1986 1995), Gardner (1983 1996) Renzulli (19781986).

,

, (Lim, Plucker & Im, 2002).

(Lynott & Woolfolk, 1994).

(Miller, 2005).

,

(Fennema,1980). , Powell Siegle (2000)

, .

48

,

(Sankar-Deleeuw, 2004)

Schack Starko (1990)

,

, . ,

, .

Taylor (1986)

,

,

,

.

,

.

(Moon & Hall,

1998).

,

(Ford,1996 Plucker,1996 Steinberg,

1996).

- ,

: ) -

(Friedman, 1994 Van Tassel-Baska, Patton & Prillaman, 1991), )

, ) , (Janos

& Robinson, 1985), ) (.

, ) (Nielsen, Higgins, Wilkinson & Webb,

1994).

49

Hutch Gardner (1986) Gardner (1983)

,

.

,

,

, .

, .

,

,

.

(Alvino & Wieler, 1979).

,

(Klausmeier, Mishra & Maker, 1987).

,

.

,

Schack Starko (1990),

.

.

,

.

Shaklee (1992)

. ,

,

. ,

,

. ,

50

,

.

,

(Shaklee, 1992).

Young Fouts (1993) ,

.

( ) ( ) .

,

().

. ,

. , .

, ,

.

Texas Education Agency

Kent, -,

(Shaklee, 1992).

Texas Identification

Jot Down .

, ,

,

(Hyatt, 1989).

Kent

/

. 4

: ) , )

, ) , )

51

.

,

(Shaklee, 1992).

Feldhusen Jarwan (1993)

, . ,

, , ,

, .

.

. Feldhusen Jarwan (1993)

,

: )

/ , )

)

.

.

(Talent pool) Renzulli (1988)

, 15%

.

. Gagne (1985) Renzulli

,

,

SRBCSS (Scale for Rating Behavioral Characteristics of Superior

Students-Revised, Renzulli et al., 2002). O Richert (1987),

..,

.

,

, ,

52

,

.

4.3

.

0 86%, 40% (Hoge & Cudmore, 1986)

, 40% .

,

.

.

,

. Hoge Cudmore (1986)

4% 78%,

36%. 36%

, .

Pegnato Birch (1959)

,

. Pyryt (1986)

, . ,

,

(.

), ,

53

. ,

, ,

. ,

(.

),

.

.

,

(Pyryt, 1986).

, ()

.

Delisle Renzulli (1982)

, .

Adderholdt-Elliot (1991)

..

90%

.

,

,

, (Feldhusen et al.,

1981).

Hoge Cudmore (1986), ,

,

54

,

.

,

. ,

, ,

-

, (Minner, 1989 OTuel,

1994).

,

(Woods & Achey, 1990).

Feldhusen Hoover (1984)

, ,

.

,

,

,

.

, , ,

(Schack & Starko, 1990).

.

Renzulli (1988),

,

,

.

(Baldwin, 1962)

, ,

55

, ,

26% .

,

, 6 ,

.

, 7 .

,

,

,

38% .

, Hoge Cudmore (1986),

40%

36%

,

. ,

,

. ,

,

.

,

,

, (

)

.

O Baldwin (1962) ,

, ,

,

. ,

56

,

, , .

Guskin, Peng Simon (1992)

,

.

,

,

. Ashman Vukelich (1983)

.

10% 48%.

,

. ,

. ,

(Gear, 1976).

(Baldwin, 1962 Ashman & Vukelich, 1983 Coleman &

Gallagher,1992 Guskin,et al.,1992) : )

, )

, )

, )

)

, .

80% 85%

, (McEachern & Bornot,

2001).

Endepohls-Ulpe (2003) 386

. ,

,

, ,

57

,

- .

Frasier (1995) 750 ,

-

.

,

.

Karnes Koch (1985),

. (Archambault et al., 1993)

, .

(Pendulla, Airesian & Madaus,1980).

,

(Schack & Starko, 1990). Rost

Hanses (1997), ,

.

-

(Neber, 2004).

,

,

,

( Kornhaber, 1999).

58

Neber (2004)

,

,

.

,

,

.

,

, ,

.

, (Ngara & Porath,

2004).

Greene (2004) 132

/ ,

,

.

, ,

.

,

,

. , ,

,

, .

: )

, )

59

, )

) .

Brown (2005)

3.000 , ,

, -

..,

.

20 /

.

, : )

, ) , )

)

.

, .

,

. .

,

,

..

(Brown, Renzulli,Gubbins, Siegle

et al., 2005).

,

.. (1999),

: ,

; 1) ,

, , 2) / , 3) -

/ / / , 4)

/ , 5) /

/ / ,

60

6) . 16

, 94% , 75% ,

44% , 44% 63% .

Archambault (1993),

3.000

. ..

,

79%, 72%

/ 70%

.

,

Cox, Daniel Boston (1985),

/ (91%),

(90%) . (82%).

Alvino, Mc Donnel Kichert (1981) ,

,

.

Chan (2004) 133

, , .

Gardner (1983) (

, , ).

-

,

.

,

.

, (Chan, 2004)

61

, ,

. Guskin, Peng & Simon (1992)

,

,

, .

Freeman (1998) ,

.

, ,

.

Tirri allent-Runnels (2004) 147

, ,

, 160 ...

.

Gagne Nadeau (1985).

,

,

,

.

Ojanen & Freeman (1994) ,

,

, .

(Buse et al., 1986) ,

,

.

62

Rosemarin (2002)

. ,

,

. , ,

,

,

.

Ngara Porath (2004)

Shona .

16 ,

Shona. ,

: ,

, , .

,

. ,

,

,

. ,

/ ,

,

.

,

,

,

: ) , ) )

. ,

,

,

63

.

, .

.

,

,

.

,

.

,

,

.

,

, ,

(Kagan,1992b).

65

5

, ,

, ,

.

5.1

,

.

,

/

, :

)

- .

)

)

.

,

- .

.

66

5.2

331 / 93

.

(,1993).

:

60.22%

39.78%

58.31%

41.69%

5.1: .

( 5.1)

. 60%

, 40% .

, 58% 42% .

67

30262524232221201918

30

20

10

0

1.12.21.13.23.2

14

28

15.1

30.1

2.2

41-5031-4022-30

80

60

40

20

0

23.26%

71.0%

5.74%

5.2:

( 5.2) ,

19 22 (81 93).

, , 312 331 31 50 .

22.58%

77.42%

OXINAI

;

19.57%

80.43%

;

5.3: .

68

( 5.3)

, .

, 77%

(72 93) ,

23% (21 93).

, 79% (263 331)

, 19% (64 331).

.

21-3011-206-101-5

50

40

30

20

10

0

11.11%

46.91%

24.69%17.28%

0.31%

2.45%5.81%

91.44%

5.4: .

. 6 20

(232 331 ) ( 5.4).

. (91,4%, 299

331). 5,8 % (19 331), 1,2%

(4 331) ( 5. 4)

69

50

40

30

20

10

0

29.96%26.35%

43.68%

-

100

80

60

40

20

0

3.77%2.83%

91.04%

2.36%

5.5 :

( 5.5) , 331 ,

121 , 73

, 83

.

,

, ( ) :

:

)

8 , 17 , 8

)

15 , 49 , 64 , 5 . , 11 , 84 ,

71 , 18 , 1 , 4 , 6 ,

1 , 2 , 1 , 2 , 3 , 13 ,

132 , 2 , 6 ., 7 , 76 , 138

70

:

3 , 4 , 6 , 2 , 2 , , 1 , 3

, , , ,

:

4 , 5 ,

:

4 , 5 , 8 , 23 , 27

/:

, , 3 , 5 , 1

, , 2 ,

:

2 /, 3 /, 6 /, 7 /, 9 /,

12 /, , , , ,

:

500 , 360.

, 331

. ,

.

. (147)

)

5 8 5 17 4 8

)

6 15 3 18 8 2

6 49 5 1 5 3

7 64 5 4 7 13

8 5 . 3 6 4 132

6 11 7 1 7 2

7 84 4 2 3 6 .

4 71 10 1 9 7

5 76 4 138

71

. (55)

10 3 3 2 3

9 4 9 2

5 6 6 1 2

2 2 4 3

. (9)

6 4 1 5 2

. (18)

6 4 4 5 3 8

3 23 2 27

. (28)

8 3 2 1

3

11

5

13

4 2

. (69)

2 2 / 10 7 / 3

4

4 3

3 /

6 /

6

4

7

9 /

12 /

5

9

12

2

.

. (5)

5

200

, 116.

93 .

.

, / (27 )

, (20 )

(12 )

. () (12 )

(22 )

72

5.3

SRBCSS-R (Scales for Rating the Behavioural Characteristics of

Superior Students-

) Renzulli, Smith, White, Callahan, Hartman & Westberg, (2002).

Renzulli

(National Research Centre on the Gifted and Talented, State University of Connecticut).

. translation back

. SRBCSS (- Likert) 43

4 :

(Learning) 13 , (otivation) 11 , (Creativity) 11 (Leadership) 8 ,

. ,

,

,

.

(Clark, 1995 Davis & Rimm, 1994 Tuttle, 1998).

. ,

SRBCSS Renzulli Hartman (Campbell & Verna, 1998).

SRBCSS 1997 2002.

,

73

.. (oge & Cudmore, 1986)

(Kalantan 1991 Srour 1989 Subhi 1997 Chan 2000). Ashman

Vukelich (1983)

SRBCSS. Renzulli, Hartman Callahan (1976)

SRBCSS, .

Hunsaker, Finley Frank (1997)

,

SRBCSS.

SRBCSS

, :

) )

...

( , ),

.

, ,

,

, , (

, .1).

above average

superior student.

:

- -

.

-

.

- .

( ).

74

,

,

(Reliability Analysis), Cronbach.

:

A ( - ).

(0,8626 > 0,7) ( , .9). ,

,

.

( ).

(0,8821 > 0,7) ( , .10).

.

5.4

2003

2003.

,

, , .

.

/ .

( :

, :

, )

( ,

)

.

75

:

1)

,

.

,

,

.

2) 10

.

3) 30 , ,

.

4) ,

.

, ,

.

5.5

( Statistical Package for the Social

Sciences-SPSS 11).

.

(frequency tables),

(pie charts),

, (bar graphs),

,

. ,

(line charts),

, .

76

, , t.

,

. ,

,

.

t (t-test). , Paired Samples Test

t,

. , Independent Sample Test

t,

. , Pearson

.

(Reliability Analysis)

Cronbachs Alpha

.

77

6

,

.

,

,

,

.

6.1 : ( )

62% (58

93) ,

37% (34 93 )

.

37%

1%

62%

78

;

1 2 1 24 4

20 21

38

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

6.2: ( )

(83 93) -

. , 6 93

, 4

( 6.2).

, 6.3

(82 93)

. , ,

.

1 1 3 3 3

17

24

41

05

1015202530354045

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

6.3: ( )

79

.

6,96,3

4,1 4,3

7,5 7,3

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

6.4: . : ) , ) ) ( 6.4)

:

1)

.

2) .

3)

.

, ( 6,9 6,3 ).

,

,

,

. ,

, ,

80

(4,1 4,3 ). , (7,5)

(7,3).

,

t ( Independent samples t- test).

6.1: t (Independent Samples Test) : ) , ) )

Levene

t-test

F Sig. t df Sig. (2-tailed)

1,87 0,17 2,14 39 0,03

1,35 0,24 -0,43 33 0,66

-

1,83 0,17 0,76 38 0,44

(.6.1)

(p = 0,003

< 0,05) :

. ,

(6,9) ( )

(6,3).

,

, .

,

, .

,

, .

.

81

)

6.2: ,

Pearson 0,265 0,290

Sig. (2-tailed) 0,011 0,005

N 92 92

** 0.01 (2-tailed).

(. 6.2) , ( r = 0,265)

:

, (p = 0,011).

, ,

.

, , (r = 0,290)

:

,

(p = 0,005). ,

, , .

. ,

:

,

.

)

: ,

82

:

,

.

6.1

,

( 6.1.1-6.1.4)

( 6.1.5-6.1.8).

4 :

(Learning) 13 . (Creativity) 11 . (Motivation) 11 . (Leadership) 8 . 9 ,

,

.

( 6.1.9)

( 6.1.10).

83

6.1.1 -

(Learning) 13 .

6.5 & 6.6: -

4,6 4,4 4,2 4,0 3,8 3,6

.

1 2 3

4 5 6 7

8 9 10

11 12 13

4.2 4.0 3.8 3.6 3.4 3.2 3 0

3, 3

4,0 3,8

4,3

3,6

3,9

3.8

3,5

4,2

3,9

4,3

3,5

3,8

3,3

4,1

3,3

4,0

3,6

4,1

3,5

3,9

3,7

4,1

3,7

4,1

3,4

84

( 6.5 & 6.6)

13

/ ,

3,75. , 13

3,8. , ,

, 13

. , ,

/

. ,

/

.

2 , t (Independent samples t-

test) ( ,.1).

,

.

B1 B2 , B3 B4

B5 , ,

B6

B7 B8 B9 B10 B11

B12 ,

B13

85

6.1.2 -

(Creativity) 11 .

6.7 : -

5,0 4,5 4,0 3,5 3,0 2,5

.

C14 C15 C16

C17 C18 C19

4,1

3,3

3,5

3,2

3,9

3,4

4,7

2,8

4,0

2,8

4,4

3,7

86

6.8 : -

BC14 BC15 O BC16 , BC17 BC18 BC19

BC20

BC21 , BC22 BC23 BC24 ,

( 6.7 & 6.8)

11

/ .

4,6 4,4 4,2 4,0 3,8 3,6 3,4 3,2

.

C20 C21 C22

C23 C24

3,6

3,8

3,4

3,8

4,4

4,1

3,9

3,5

3,8

4,5

87

3,8. , 11

3,7.

,

,

11 ,

. , ,

/ ,

.

/

.

2 , t (Independent samples t-

test) ( ,. .2).

: BC14 (p = 0,000 < 0,05) ( ),

BC15 (p = 0,000 < 0,05)( ), BC16 (p = 0,000 < 0,05)(

, ), BC17 (p = 0,000 < 0,05)

( ), BC18 (p = 0,000 < 0,05) ( ), BC19 (p =

0,017 < 0,05) (

), BC20 (p = 0,000 < 0,05) (

).

, 11

/ , 7

.

88

6.1.3 -

(Motivation) 11 .

16

6.9: -

5,0 4,8 4,6 4,4 4,2 4,0 3,8 3,6

.

M31 M32 M33

M34 M35

4,9

3,9

4,5

4,1 4,1

4,8

3,9

4,2

4,0

3,9

89

( 6.9)

11

/ ,

4,1. , 11

4,15.

,

11

. ,

/

.

/

.

, t (Independent samples

t- test) ( , . .3). O

: B26 (p = 0,012 < 0,05) (

), B33 (p = 0,004 < 0,05) (

, ).

, 11

/ ,

.

B25

B26 B27 B28

B29

B30

B31 B32

B33 ,

B34

B35

90

6.1.4 -

(Leadership) 8 .

6.10: -

BL36 ,

BL37 BL38 BL39 O BL40 , BL41 BL42

BL43 ,

4,6 4,4 4,2 4,0 3,6 3,4 3,2 3,0 2,2 2,0

.

L36 L37 L38

L39 L40 L41 L42 L43

4,5 4,3

3,0

3,5

3,3

3,6

4,2

2,9

4,4

4,0

2,9

3,0

3,4

3,5

4,2

3,0

91

( 6.10)

8 ,

/ .

3,7.

, 8

3,8.

, ,

8

, .

, ,

/

.

/

.

, t (Independent samples

t- test) ( , . .4).

(p = 0,000 < 0,05) : L36 (

, ).

, (4,37) /

( ) , ,

(3,95).

.

, 4

( . 82).

92

6.1.5

(Learning) 13 .

6.11:

6.12: .

5,4 5,2 5,0 4,8 4,6 4 4

CK1 CK2

CK4 CK5 CK6 CK7

5 2

5 0

5 1

5 2

4 9

5 05 2

4,74 8

4 8

4 9

4 6

4 84 7

5,5 5,0 4,0 3,5 3,0 2,5 2,0

CK8 CK9 CK10

CK11 CK12 CK13

2,

4,

5,

5,

3,

5,

3,

4,

4,5,

4,0

4,

93

( 6.11 & 6.12),

13

, ,

,

4,6. ,

13 5.

, ,

,

13 .

- .

, t (Independent samples

t- test). O

(p < 0,05)

( ,..5). , p=

0,000 p=0,019 < 0,05.

CK1 CK2 , CK3 CK4

CK5 , ,

CK6 CK7 CK8 CK9 CK10 CK11

CK12 ,

CK13

94

6.1.6 (Creativity) 11 .

6.13 & 6.14:

5,5 5,0 4,5 4,0 3,5 3,0

CC14 CC15 CC16

CC17 CC18 CC19

5,5 5,0 4,5 4,0 3,5 3,0

CC20 CC21 CC22

CC23 CC24

5,1

2,9

5,0

2,6

4,6

5,0 5,1

3,1

4,9

2,9

4,5

4,9

3,8

4,9 4,8

5,1

3,2

4,0

4,7

4,7

4,9

3,6

95

CC14 CC15 O CC16 , CC17 CC18 CC19

CC20

CC21 , CC22 CC23 CC24 ,

( 6.13 & 6.14)

11

,

.

4,3. ,

11 4,27.

11 , .

, , ,

,

, ,

.

-

.

, t (Independent samples

t- test) ( ,..6).

: CC17 (p = 0,013 < 0,05) ( ), CC23 (p = 0,044 < 0,05)

( ), CC24 (p = 0,019 < 0,05) ( ,

). , 11 ,

96

, 3

.

6.1.7 (Motivation) 11 .

6.15 & 6.16:

6,0 5,5 5,0 4,5 4,0 3,5 3,0 2,5

.

CM25 CM26 CM27

CM28 CM29 CM30

3,0

4,.5

5,1

5,4

5,2 5,2

3,5

4,3 4,7

5,2

4,9

4,8

6,0 5,5 5,0 4,5 4,0 3,5

.

CM31 CM32 CM33

CM34 CM35

5,5

4,7

5,3

5,4

3,8

5,2

4,7

5,1

5,2

4,1

97

( 6.15 & 6.16),

11

,

,

4,7. ,

11

4,8.

,

11 .

.

, t (Independent samples

t- test) ( ,..7). O

: CM25 (p = 0,008 < 0,05) (

), C27 (p = 0,000 < 0,05) (

), C28 (p = 0,003 < 0,05) (

), C29 (p = 0,022 < 0,05) (

), C31 (p = 0,002 < 0,05) (

), C33 (p = 0,039 < 0,05) (

CM25

CM26 CM27 CM28

CM29

CM30

CM31 CM32

CM33 ,

CM34

CM35

98

, ),

C34 (p = 0,020 < 0,05) ( ), C35 (p = 0,028 < 0,05)

(

).

, 11

, 8

.

6.1.8 (Leadership) 8 .

6.17:

6,0 5,5 5,0 4,5 4,0 3,5 3,0 2,5 2,0

.

CL36 CL37 CL38 CK39

CL40 CL41 CL42 CL43

5,4 5,1

2,7

2,5

5,0

3,1

5,1 5,2 5,1

4,9

3,1

2,9

4,6

4,7

4,9

99

CL36 ,

CL37 CL38 CL39 O CL40 , CL41 CL42

CL43 ,

( 6.17)

8

, .

4,18. ,

8 4,26. , ,

,

8 .

,

-

.

, t (Independent samples t- test)

( ,..8).

(p < 0,05),

, CL37.

p=

0,000 p=0,028 < 0,05.

100

6.1.9

, ,

4

/

.

t- (

Paired Samples Test).

,

/

, .

6.3: () ()

N

3,800 13 ,3189

4,523 13 ,5585

3,754 13 ,3431

4,715 13 ,8040

(Paired Samples Test)

t df Sig. (2-tailed)

-,723 ,6685 -3,900 12 ,002

-,962 ,9853 -3,518 12 ,004

6.3 , ,

, / (p = 0,002 < 0,05).

101

.

, , ,

/ (p = 0,004 < 0,05).

.

,

/

.

6.4: () ()

N

3,836 11 ,6233 4,300 11 ,7785

3,673 11 ,3663 4,273 11 ,9624

(Paired Samples Test)

t df Sig. (2-tailed)

- -,464 ,6531 -2,354 10 ,040

-,600 ,9592 -2,075 10 ,065

(.6.4) , ,

/ (p = 0,040 < 0,05).

.

, ,

/ (p = 0,065 >

0,05). .

102

,

/

.

6.5: () ()

N

4,118 11 ,4191 4,700 11 ,5404

4,182 11 ,3401 4,809 11 ,7803

(Paired Samples Test)

t df Sig. (2-tailed)

- -,582 ,6161 -3,132 10 ,011

-,627 ,7695 -2,703 10 ,022

(.6.5) , ,

/ (p = 0,011 < 0,05).

.

, ,

/ (p = 0,022 <

0,05). .

,

/

.

103

6.6: () ()

N

3,725 8 ,4713 4,188 8 ,8919

3,775 8 ,5064 4,263 8 1,2546

(Paired Samples Test)

t df Sig. (2-tailed)

- -,462 ,7444 -1,757 7 ,122

- -,488 ,9906 -1,392 7 ,207

(.6.6) , ,

/ (p = 0,122 > 0,05).

.

, ,

/ (p = 0,207 >

0,05). .

104

6.1.10

,

Pearson.

(.6.7- .6.10 )

.

6.7:

BK13 BK10 Pearson 0,209* ,250* Sig. (2-tailed) 0,050 ,01 N 92 92

* 0.05 (2-tailed). ** 0.01 (2-tailed). BK13 ( ) BK10 ( )

(.6.7) , (Pearson < 0,5)

:

BK13 ( ), , 5% (

0,01), (two-tailed)

[

].

BK10 ( ), ,

5% ( 0,01),

(two-tailed).

6.7

/

105

,

.

6.8:

CC19 CC20

CC21 CK2 CK7

Pearson 0,229* 0,285** 0,327** 0,246* 0,254* Sig. (2-tailed) 0,028 0,006 0,001 0,019 0,015 N 92 92 92 92 91

CM26 CM27 CM31 CM32 CM34 Pearson 0,215* 0,275*

* 0,225* 0,249* 0,232* 0,212*

Sig. (2-tailed) 0,042 0,008 0,031 0,017 0,026 0,042 N 92 92 92 91 92 92

* 0.05 (2-tailed). ** 0.01 (2-tailed). CK2 ( , ) CK7 ( ) CC19 ( )

CC20 ( ) CC21 ( , ) CM26 ( ) CM27 ( ) CM28 ( ) CM31 ( ) CM32 ( ) CM34 ( )

(.6.8) , (r < 0,5)

:

CK2 ( , ), , 5%

(two-tailed).

CK7 ( ), ,

5% (two-tailed).

CC19 ( ), ,

5% (two-tailed).

106

CC20 ( ), ,

1% (two-tailed).

CC21 ( , ), ,

1% (two-tailed).

CM26 ( ), , 5%

(two-tailed).

CM27 ( ), , 1%

(two-tailed).

CM28 ( ), , 5%

(two-tailed).

CM31 ( ), , 5%

(two-tailed).

CM32 ( ), , 5%

(two-tailed).

CM34 ( ), , 5% (two-tailed).

6.8

, ,

.

107

6.9:

BK5 BK7 BC20 Pearson 0,109* 0,121* -0,120* Sig. (2-tailed) 0,047 0,028 0,047 N 329 329 330

* 0.05 (2-tailed). ** 0.01 (2-tailed).

5 ( , , )

B7 ( )

BC20 ( )

(.6.9) ,

(r < 0,5) :

5 ( , , ), ,

5% (two-tailed).

B7 ( ), , 5%

(two-tailed).

BC20 ( ), ,

5% (two-tailed).

6.9

/

,

.

108

6.10:

CK5 CK6 CK11 CK13 Pearson 0,129* 0,156* 0,112* 0,120* Sig. (2-tailed) 0,019 0,005 0,041 0,029 N 330 330 330 330

* 0.05 (2-tailed). CC16 CC20 CM28 CM30

Pearson 0,111* -0,115* 0,171* 0,114* Sig. (2-tailed) 0,044 0,038 0,002 0,039 N 330 330 329 330

* 0.05 (2-tailed).

CK5 ( , , )

CK6 ( )

CK11 ( )

CK13 ( )

CC20 ( )

CC16 ( , )

CM28 ( )

CM30 (

)

(.6.10) , (r < 0,5)

:

CK5 ( , , ), ,

5% (two-tailed).

CK6 ( ), , 5%

(two-tailed).

CK11 ( ), , 5% (two-tailed).

CK13 ( ), , 5%

(two-tailed).

CC20 ( ), ,

5% (two-tailed).

109

CC16 ( , ), , 5%

(two-tailed).

CM28 ( ), , 5%

(two-tailed).

CM30 ( ),

, 5% (two-tailed).

,

.

110

7

-

,

(. 7, .77)

5.1 (.65).

1)

2) -

3) , ,

,

.

, (

) (82/83)

,

, 62%

. , (

)

(83/93).

(Tomlinson,et al.,1995)

,

,

.

,

.

111

- (1991),

.

, , ,

, .

, ,

,

.

,

,

(79% 77% ).

(Goodman, 1988)

, .

.

,

,

.

(. 6.9)

, (. 6.3).

(Gari, 2003), ,

,

.

, ;

,

.

112

,

, : ,

,

,

,

(Richardson, 2003).

.

(Gari, 2003), ,

, ,

,

.

, , ,

,

. ,

. , ,

,

.

, ,

:

, ,

,

,

.

113

, ,

.. ,

, ,

.

(. 4.1) (. 4.3),

,

, (.

: 7.5 , . : 7.3).

Berliner (1994)

. ,

,

.

.

,

,

.

, (Megay-

Nespoli, 2001 Rash & Miller, 2000).

Megay-Nespoli (2001)

,

.

,

,

.

.

. ,

114

.

,

, ,

.

, ( -

),

-

(

SRBCSS-R). ,

,

, - ,

- .

, ,

( Butterfly,1979).

,

(Guskin,

Peng & Majd-Jabbari, 1988 Goodnough, 2001).

,

.

,

. (

)

(Gari,

2003).

115

. ,

; , ,

(1998) , ,

. :

, ,

- .

( )

,

, (

)

,

.

, ,

.

,

.

Rosenthal Jacobson (1968)

.

,

. ,

.

,

116

, (Good,1987).

, ,

.

Schack Starko (1990), ,

,

,

,

.

, ,

, (Gari et al., 2000).

,

( ),

.

SRBCSS-R, (Chan, 2000),

. ,

.

,

, , ,

.

, Torres (2001), yre

Geake, (2002)

,

,

.

117

Peterson Margolin (1997)

,

, .

Hunsaker, Finley Frank (1997)

,

.

(2003),

,

,

. , ,

,

.

,

(Theodoridou, et al., 2003).

-

.

, ,

,

(Richert, 2003). ,

,

118

.

, Friedman, Jenkins-Friedman Van Dyke (1984) ,

,

.

.

,

.

(Hany,1993).

(Sak, 2004), .

Renzulli (1976) , ,

. , ,

,

(Alencar,1993).

,

.

,

(Sak, 2004).

(Dacey,1989

Parnes,1967). Cropley (1994)

,

. : , ,

, .

119

: , , ,

.

,

,

, ,

(Freeman & Josepsson, 2002).

,

.

, , ,

, ,

, (Sternberg &

Lubart,1995).

, (1998)

,

:

, -

, , ,

,

. ,

, ,

, .

Westby Dawson (1995)

.

-

. ,

, , ,

.

120

, .

(Tan, 2001). Runco

(1990) Starke (1995) ,

, ,

. , Gentry, Rizza Owen (2002)

.

(Alencar, 1993),

(Buse et, al.,1986),

,

.

, , ,

.

,

(Kerr &

Cohn, 2001, .39). ,

(Piirto, 1998).

Freeman Jossepsson,

(2002)

, ,

, .

- (1991),

102 ,

, :

,

;

121

,

, (1%)

,

.

,

,

.

Chan (2000), SRBCSS

. , ,

. , , (Chan, 2001)

, ,

. Rohrer (1995)

, ,

.

,

( & , 1998).

(Kalantan,1991 Chan, 2001 & , 2003 Rosemarin, 2002).

, ,

,

(Wedd,1994).

Shaklee (1992), ,

,

. Endepohls-Ulpe (2003)

,

122

.

(Runco,1992), , ,

.

, ,

, ,

.

.

Schack Starko (1990)

, , , ,

.

, ,

, .

.

,

,

, .

(2003),

. ,

(Theodoridou et al.,

2003),

,

, , .

123

, , ,

(Schack & Starko,1990 Tomlinson et al., 1994).

, (2004-2005)

, ,

, ,

,

.

Chan (2004) SRBCSS ,

, ,

.

, ,

,

(Dixn et al., 1996).

(Tomlinson,et al.,1994 Ribich et al.,1998).

, ,

(

) ,

,

.

Balch (1993), ,

. ,

,

.

124

, ,

,

.

,

. ,

,

.

Immegart, , (2004, .391),

, , ,

, .

, (

, ,

)

, , .

,

(

) ,

,

( ) ( )

.

.

,

(Westerman, 1991).

,

,

, ,

.

125

, ,

,

.

,

.

Goodnough (2001)

, -

.

,

,

.

,

.

(90.3%)

6 20

.

( & -,1991).

.

,

,

, , .

,

126

.

.

. ,

. ,

,

.

, ,

.

(Theodoridou, et.al., 2003)

... ... , ,

,

, .

,

/ ,

.

127

8

8.1

,

.

.

.

,

:

1 :

( )

- .

-.

-

.

- ,

.

128

2 :

.

.

,

.

3 :

.

,

.

.

.

, ,

.

, ,

.

, ,

.

129

,

, ,

- .

8.2.

:

- SRBCSS-R

- ,

- ,

,

.

.

SRBCSS-R ,

.

, ,

.

130

.

, ( & ,

1998).

,

,

.

, ....,

,

,

.

, ,

, ,

.

,

,

,

.

.

.

131

, (, 2003, 2004).

,

,

. ,

.

,

, ,

.

,

.

.

(Shore, 2000).

(Kanevsky, 1990 Coleman & Shore,

1991 Sternberg & Horvath, 1998 Shore, 2000).

, .

.

. ,

,

132

.

,

,

. )

)

,

,

(Showers, 1987 Showers, Joyce & Bennet, 1987 Kagan, 1992a ).

(Clift &Wilson, 1984 Neubert, 1988

Peterson & Hudson, 1989).

.

(Showers et al.,1987).

,

(Fessler & Burke,1983). ,

, ,

, .

.

- (2004)

133

,

.

. -

(Case Method of Instruction, CMI).

50 Harvard Business School

,

,

, ,

(Mc William, 1992).

,

. ,

,

,

.

,

, ,

, ,

.

, ()

,

, ,

(, 2004).

134

, project,

(-, 2003).

,

/ ,

(, 2003). ,

,

.

(Renzulli,1976)

, ,

,

,

.

,

(Renzulli, Reiss & Smith, 1981)

- -

.

, ()

(Renzulli & Reiss, 1985),

.

( Olenchak & Renzulli, 1989 Renzulli & Reiss, 1994).

,

, ,

135

(, 2002).

,

,

.

- ,

,

. ,

.

, ,

,

.

. ,

,

.

, :

-

,

-

, ,

136

-

, / /

-

,

,

, ,

, .

, ,

, .

, ,

.

,

.

137

Adderholdt -Elliot, M., Algozzine, B., Algozzine, K., & Haney, K. (1991).Current state

practices in educating students who are gifted and talented. Roeper Review,14(1), 20-23. Alencar, E. (1993). Thinking in the future: The need to promote creativity in the educational

context. Gifted Education International, 9, 93-95. Alexander, C., & Strain, P.S. (1978). A review of educators attitudes toward handicapped

children and the concept of mainstreaming. Psychology in the school, 15(3), 390-396. Alvino, J., & Wieler, J. (1979). How standardized testing fails to identify the gifted and what

teachers can do about it. Phi Delta Kappa, 106-109. Alvino, J., Mc Donnel, R. C., & Richert, S. (1981). National survey of identification practices

in gifted and talented education. Exceptional Children, 48, 124-132. Alvino, J. (1991). Social and emotional well being: An investigation into the needs of gifted

boys. Roeper Review, 13 (4), 174-180. Archambault, F.X., Westberg, K. L., Brown, S. W. ,Hallmark, B. W., Emmons, C. L., & Zhang,

W.(1993). Classroom practices used with gifted third and fourth grade students. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 16,103-119.

Ashman, S.S., & Vukelich, C. (1983). The effect of different types of nomination forms on

teachers identification of gifted students. Psychology in the Schools, 20, 518-527. Ashton, P, T., & Webb, R .B. (1986). Making a difference: Teachers sense of efficacy and

student achievement. New York: Longman. Baker, J. (1996) .Everyday stressors of academically gifted adolescents. Journal of secondary

Gifted Education, Winter, 356-68. Balch, M. (1993). The gifted child: Personality traits, learning styles and useful teaching

strategies. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. EC 304235) Baldwin, J.W. (1962).The relationship between teacher-judged giftedness, a group intelligence

test and an individual intelligence test with possible gifted kindergarden pupils. The Gifted Child Quarterly, 153-157.

138

Berliner, D.C. (1994). Expertise: The wonder of exemplary performances. In: J.Magieri & C.C. Collins (Eds.). Creating powerful thinking in teachers and students: Diverse populations (pp.161-186). Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace.

Bernai., H. M. (2000). The quintessential features of gifted education as seen from a

multicultural perspective. In: G. B. Esquivel & J. C. Houtz (Eds.). Creativity and giftedness in culturally diverse students (pp. 159-191 ). Cresskill. NJ: Harrington Press.

Betts, G., & Neihart, M. (1986). Implementing self-directed learning models for the gifted and

talented. Gifted Child Quaterly, 30(4), 174-177. Bloom, B. S. (Ed.). (1985). Developing talent in young people. New York: Ballantine Books. Blumen- Pardo, S. (2002). Effects of a teacher training workshop on creativity, cognition and

school achievement in gifted and non-gifted second-grade students in Lima, Peru. High Ability Studies, 13 ,47-58.

Borko, H., & Shavelson, R. S. (1990). Teacher decision making. In: B.F. Jones & L. Idol (Eds.).

Dimensions of thinking and cognitive instruction (pp. 311-346).Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Bragget, E. J. (1994). Developing programs for gifted students. Melbourne: Hawker Brownlow

Education. Brown, W. S., Renzulli, S. J., Gubbins, E. J., Siegle, D., et al.(2005). Assumptions underlying

the identification of gifted and talented students. The Gifted Chil Quarterly, 49 (1), 68-80.

Burns, D. E. (1992b). SEM network directory. Storrs, CT: University of Connecticut, Teaching

The Talented Program. Butterfly, T. (1979).Preservice teachersattitudes regarding gifted children. College Student

Journal, 12, 288-289. Busse, T., Dahme, T.G., Wagner, H., & Wieczerkowski, W.(1986). Factors underlying teacher

perceptions of highly gifted students: A cross cultural study. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 46, 903-915.

Cain, R.G., et al. (1980). Education of the Gifted in Florida: An Occasional Paper. Fort Myers,

FL: Florida educational Research and Development Council, Inc. Campbell, J.R., & Verna, M. (1998). Messages from the Field: American Teachers of the

Gifted Talk Back to the Research Community. Paper presented at the annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association (San Diego, CA, April 13-17)

139

Calderhead, J. (1993). The contribution of research on teachers thinking to the professional development of teachers. In : C. Day, L. Calderhead, & P. Denicolo (Eds). Research on teacher thinking: Understanding professional development (pp.11-18). London: Falmer Press.

Chan, W. D. (2000). Exploring Identification Procedures of Gifted Students by Teacher Ratings:

parent ratings and student self reports in Hong Kong. High Ability studies,11, (1), 69-81. Chan, W. D. (2000a).Identifying gifted and talented students in Hong Kong. Roeper Review, 22,

88-93. Chan, W.D. (2001).Assessing giftedness of Chinese secondary students in Hong Kong: A

multiple intelligences perspective. High Ability Studies, 12(2), 215-233. Chan, W. D. (2004). Multiple intelligences of Chinese gifted students in Hong Kong:

Perspectives from students, parents, teachers and peers. Roeper Review, 27(1), 18- 25. Chitwood, D.G. (1986).Guiding parents seeking testing. Roeper Review, 8(3), 177-179. Clark, B. (1984). Growing up gifted. Charles Merrill Publisher. Clark, B. (1995). Growing up gifted (5thed.). Columbus, Ohio: Charles E. Merrill Publishing Co. Clark, C., Dyson, A., Millward, A. J., & Skidmore. D. (1977). New directions in Special Needs,

Innovations in Mainstream Schools. London: Cassel Clark, C .M., & Peterson, P. L. (1986). Teachers thought processes. In: M.C Wittrock (Ed.).

Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp.255-296).New York: Macmillan. Clift, R. T., & Wilson, S. (1984, April). Training preservice teachers to use dramatic

activities with secondary school students. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 258 168)

Clinkenbeard, P. R.(1991). Unfair expectations: A pilot study of middle school students

comparisons of gifted and regular classes. Journal for the Education of the Gifted,15, 56-63.

Cohen, L. M. (1988).Meeting the needs of gifted and talented minority language students: Issues

and practices. New Focus, 8, 1-7. Cohen, L., & Manion, L. (1997). :. Coleman, M. R., & Gallagher, J .J. (1992). State policies for identification of nontraditional

gifted students. Gifted Child Today, 15-17.

140

Coleman, M. R., & Gallagher, J. J. (