Advertisement

Child & Youth Care Forum

, Volume 43, Issue 3, pp 287–314 | Cite as

The Pullout Program Day a Week School for Gifted Children: Effects on Social–Emotional and Academic Functioning

  • Rachel T. van der Meulen
  • Corine O. van der Bruggen
  • Jantine L. Spilt
  • Jaap Verouden
  • Maria Berkhout
  • Susan M. Bögels
Original Paper

Abstract

Background

Gifted children learn differently compared to their peers in several ways. However, their educational needs are often not met in regular schools, which may result in underachievement and social–emotional and behavioral problems. A pullout program, the “Day a Week School” (DWS), was offered to gifted children in 25 elementary schools from neighborhoods of higher and lower SES in Amsterdam.

Objective

To investigate whether DWS decreases children’s social–emotional and behavior problems and parents’ stress, and improves children’s self-concept, enjoyment at school, and academic achievement.

Methods

Gifted children (grades 3–5) were selected through a standardized identification procedure assessing “out-of-the box”, logical, and creative thinking and motivation (n = 89). Children, as well as both their parents and teachers, completed questionnaires before the start of DWS and after 2,5 months. Results were analyzed for all children and for at-risk children with higher levels of psychopathology before starting DWS.

Results

Analyses on the total group showed small positive effects on children’s self-reported self-concept dimensions, scholastic competence and behavioral conduct, as well as on fathers’ reported child prosocial behavior. In the at-risk group, children reported medium positive effects on scholastic competence and behavioral conduct, and on sleep problems and worry, and small improvements on enjoyment at school. Parents of at-risk children reported decreased child’s somatic complaints and decreased social–emotional and behavioral problems. Finally, teachers reported higher academic achievement and medium positive effects on inattention-hyperactivity in the at-risk group.

Conclusions

Day a Week School appears to be a promising pullout program for gifted children, particularly for children at-risk for psychopathology.

Keywords

Gifted children Special education Pullout program Social–emotional functioning Academic functioning 

Notes

Conflict of interest

None.

References

  1. Abidin, R. R. (1983). Parenting stress index manual. Charlottesville: Pediatric Psychology Press.Google Scholar
  2. Alsop, G. (1997). Coping or counseling: Families of intellectually gifted students. Roeper Review, 20, 28–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Archambault, F. X, Jr, Westberg, K. L., Brown, S., Hallmark, B. W., Emmons, C., & Zhang, W. (1993). Regular classroom practices with gifted students: Results of a national survey of classroom teachers. Storrs, CT: The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented, University of Connecticut.Google Scholar
  4. Baker, J. A. (1995). Depression and suicidal ideation among academically talented students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 39, 218–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Barnett, L., & Fiscella, J. (1985). A child by any other name: A comparison of the playfulness of gifted and nongifted children. Gifted Child Quarterly, 29, 61–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Betts, J. R., & Shkolnik, J. L. (2000). The effects of ability grouping on student math achievement and resource allocation in secondary schools. Economics of Education Review, 19, 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bong, M., & Skaalvik, E. M. (2003). Academic self-concept and self-efficacy: How different are they really? Educational Psychology Review, 15, 1–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brody, L. E., & Milss, C. J. (1997). Gifted children with learning disabilities: A review of the issues. Journal of learning disabilities, 30, 282–286.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Colangelo, N., Assouline, S., & Gross, M. (Eds.). (2004). A nation deceived: How schools hold back America’s brightest students. Iowa City, IA: The University of Iowa.Google Scholar
  10. Coleman, L. J., & Cross, T. (1988). Is being gifted a social handicap? Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 11, 41–56.Google Scholar
  11. Coleman, J. M., & Fults, B. A. (1982). Self-concept and the gifted classroom: The role of social comparisons. Gifted Child Quarterly, 26, 116–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Csikszentmihalyi, M., Rathunde, K., & Whalen, S. (1993). Talented teenagers. The roots of success and failure. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Cummings, C., & Hoare, A. (2008). Day-a-week-school. Echa News, 22, 24–26.Google Scholar
  14. Czeschlik, T., & Rost, D. H. (1994). Socio-emotional adjustment in elementary school boys and girls: Does giftedness make a difference? Roeper Review, 16, 294–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. De Brock, A., Vermulst, A. A., Gerris, J. R. M., & Abidin, R. R. (1992). Nijmeegse Ouderlijke Stress Index. Handleiding experimentele versie. Lisse: Swets & Zeitlinger.Google Scholar
  16. Deary, I. J., Thorpe, G., Wilson, V., Starr, J. M., & Whalley, L. J. (2003). Population sex differences in IQ at age 11: the Scottish mental survey 1932. Intelligence, 31, 533–542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dekovic, M., Groenendaal, J. H. A., & Gerrits, L. A. W. (1996). Opvoederkenmerken. In J. Rispens, J. M. A. Hermanns, & W. H. J. Meeus (Eds.), Opvoeden in Nederland (pp. 70–94). Assen: Van Gorcum.Google Scholar
  18. Delcourt, M. A. B., Cornell, D. G., & Goldberg, M. D. (2007). Cognitive and affective learning Outcomes of gifted elementary school students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 51, 359–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Eccles, A. L., Bauman, E., & Rotenberg, K. J. (1989). Peer acceptance and self-esteem in gifted children. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 4, 401–409.Google Scholar
  20. Feldman, D. H., & Piirto, J. (1995). Parenting talented children. In M. H. Bornstein (Ed.), Handbook of parenting (pp. 285–304). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  21. Freeman, J. (1994). Some emotional aspects of being gifted. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 17, 180–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Gallagher, J., Harradine, C., & Coleman, M. (1997). Challenge or boredom: Gifted students’ view on their schooling. Roeper Review, 19, 132–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Gallagher, J., Weiss, P., Oglesby, K., & Thomas, T. (1983). The status of gifted and talented education: United States survey of needs, practices, and policies. Los Angeles: Leadership Training Institute.Google Scholar
  24. Garner, D. (1991). Eating disorders in the gifted adolescent. In M. Bierely & J. L. Genschaft (Eds.), Understanding the gifted adolescent (pp. 50–64). New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  25. Geake, J. G., & Gross, M. U. M. (2008). Teachers’ negative affect toward academically gifted students: An evolutionary psychological study. Gifted Child Quarterly, 52, 217–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Goodman, R. (1997). The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire: A research note. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 38, 581–586.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Goodman, R. (1999). The extended version of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire as a guide to child psychiatric caseness and consequent burden. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 40, 791–801.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Goodman, R., & Scott, S. (1999). Comparing the strengths and difficulties questionnaire and the child behavior checklist; is small beautiful? Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 27, 17–24.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Gross, M. U. M. (1993). Exceptionally gifted children. London and New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Gross, M. U. M. (2006). Exceptionally gifted children: Long-term outcomes of academic acceleration and nonacceleration. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 29, 404–429.Google Scholar
  31. Gust-Brey, K., & Cross, T. (1999). An examination of the literature based on the suicidal behaviors of gifted students. Roeper Review, 22, 28–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Hackney, H. (1981). The gifted child, the family, and the school. Gifted Child Quarterly, 25, 51–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Harter, S. (1985). The self-perception profile for children: Revision of the perceived competence scale for children. Denver, CO: University of Denver.Google Scholar
  34. Hedges, L. V., & Nowell, A. (1995). Sex differences in mental test scores, variability, and numbers of high-scoring individuals. Science, 269, 41–45.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Hoffer, T. B. (1992). Middle school ability grouping and student achievement in science and mathematics. Educational evaluation and policy analysis, 14, 205–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Hollingworth, L. S. (1926). Gifted children: Their nature and nurture. New York: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Janos, P. M., Fung, H. C., & Robinson, N. M. (1985). Self-concept, self-esteem, and peer relations among gifted children who feel “different”. Gifted Child Quarterly, 29, 78–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Jellesma, F. C., Meerum Terwogt, M., Reijntjes, A., Rieffe, C., & Stegge, H. (2005). De vragenlijst Non-Productieve Denkprocessen voor Kinderen (NPDK): Piekeren en Rumineren. Kind en Adolescent, 26, 368–378.Google Scholar
  39. Jellesma, F. C., Rieffe, C., & Meerum Terwogt, M. (2007). The somatic complaint list: Validation of a self-report questionnaire assessing somatic complaints in children. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 63, 399–401.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Jolly, J. L., & Matthews, M. S. (2012). A critique of the literature on parenting gifted learners. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 35, 259–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Kearney, K. (1996). Highly gifted children in full inclusion classrooms. The Hollingworth Center for Highly Gifted Children, 12(4). Retrieved 10/07/2013 from http://www.hollingworth.org/fullincl.html.
  42. Keirouz, K. S. (1990). Concerns of parents of gifted children: A research review. Gifted Child Quarterly, 34, 56–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Kelly, K. R., & Colangelo, N. (1984). Academic and social self-concepts of gifted, general and special students. Exceptional Children, 50, 551–554.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Krause, K., Bochner, S., & Duchesne, S. (2003). Educational psychology for learning and teaching. Southbank, Victoria: Thomson.Google Scholar
  45. Kulik, C. L. C., & Kulik, J. A. (1982). Effects of ability grouping on secondary school students: A meta-analysis of evaluation findings. American Educational Research Journal, 19, 415–428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Kulik, J. A., & Kulik, C. L. C. (1984). Effects of accelerated instruction on students. Review of Educational Research, 54, 409–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Kulik, C. L. C., & Kulik, J. A. (1990). Effectiveness of mastery learning programs: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 60, 265–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Kulik, J. A., & Kulik, C. L. C. (1992). Meta-analytic findings on grouping programs. Gifted Child Quarterly, 36, 73–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Kwan, P. C. F. (1992). On a pedestal: Effects of intellectual giftedness and some implications for programmed planning. Educational Psychology, 12, 37–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Lou, Y., Abrami, P. C., Spence, J., Chambers, B., Poulsen, C., & d’Apollonia, S. (1996). Within-class grouping: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 66, 423–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Marsh, H. W., Chessor, D., Craven, R. G., & Roche, L. (1995). The effects of gifted and talented programs on academic self-concept: The big fish strikes again. American Educational Research Journal, 32, 285–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Marsh, H. W., & Hau, K. T. (2003). Big-fish–little-pond effect on academic self-concept: A cross-cultural (26-country) test of the negative effects of academically selective schools. American Psychologist, 58, 364–376.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Marsh, H. W., Hau, K., & Craven, R. (2004). The big-fish–little-pond effect stands up to scrutiny. American Psychologist, 59, 269–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Marsh, H. W., & Parker, J. (1984). Determinants of student self-concept: Is it better to be a relatively large fish in a small pond even if you don’t learn to swim as well? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47, 213–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Martin, L. T., Burns, R. M., & Schonlau, M. (2010). Mental disorders among gifted an nongifted youth: A selected review of the epidemiologic literature. Gifted Child Quarterly, 54, 31–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. May, K. M. (1990). A developmental view of a gifted child’s social and emotional adjustment. Roeper Review, 17, 105–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Meijer, A. M., & Van den Wittenboer, G. L. H. (2004). The joint contribution of sleep, intelligence and motivation to school performance. Personality and Individual Differences, 37, 95–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Moon, T. R., Tomlinson, C. A., & Callahan, C. M. (1995). Academic diversity in the middle school: Results of a national survey of middle school administrators and teachers (Research Monograph 95124). Storrs, CT: The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented, University of Connecticut.Google Scholar
  59. Morawska, A., & Sanders, M. R. (2009). Parenting gifted and talented children: Conceptual and empirical foundations. Gifted Child Quarterly, 53, 163–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Morelock, M. J. (1992). Giftedness: The view from within. Understanding our gifted, 4, 11–15.Google Scholar
  61. Neihart, M. (2002). Delinquency and gifted children. In M. Neihart, S. M. Reis, S. M. Robinson, & S. M. Moon (Eds.), The social and emotional development of gifted children: What do we know? (pp. 103–112). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.Google Scholar
  62. Neihart, M. (2007). The socioaffective impact of acceleration and ability grouping: Recommendations for best practice. Gifted Child Quarterly, 51, 330–341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Olenchak, F. R. (1990). School change through gifted education: Effects on elementary students’ attitudes toward learning. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 14, 66–78.Google Scholar
  64. Osin, L., & Lesgold, A. (1996). A proposal for the reengineering of the educational system. Review of educational research, 66, 621–656.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Parker, W. (1996). Psychological adjustment in mathematically gifted students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 40, 154–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Peterson, J. S. (2009). Myth 17: Gifted and talented individuals do not have unique social and emotional needs. Gifted Child Quarterly, 53, 280–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Pfeiffer, S. I., & Stocking, V. B. (2000). Vulnerabilities of academically gifted students. Special Services in the Schools, 16, 83–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Plucker, J. A., & McIntyre, J. (1996). Academic survivability in high-potential middle school students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 40, 7–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Plucker, J. A., Robinson, N. M., Greenspon, T. S., Feldhusen, J. F., McCoach, D. B., & Subotnik, R. F. (2004). It’s not how the pond makes you feel, but rather how high you can jump. American Psychologist, 59, 268–269.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Porter, L. (2005). Gifted young children: A guide for parents and teachers (2nd ed.). Crows Nest, Australia: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
  71. Reis, S. M., & Purcell, J. H. (1993). An analysis of content elimination and strategies used by elementary classroom teachers in the curriculum compacting process. Journal for the education of the gifted, 16, 147–170.Google Scholar
  72. Reis, S. M., & Renzulli, J. S. (2004). Current research on the social and emotional development of gifted and talented students: Good news and future possibilities. Psychology in the Schools, 41, 119–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Renzulli, J. S. (1981). Identifying key features in programs for the gifted. In W. B. Barbe & J. S. Renzulli (Eds.), Psychology and education of the gifted (pp. 214–219). New York: Irvington.Google Scholar
  74. Renzulli, J. S., Smith, L. A., & Reis, S. M. (1982). Curriculum compacting: An essential strategy for working with gifted students. The Elementary School Journal, 82, 185–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Reynolds, C. R., & Bradley, M. (1983). Emotional stability of intellectually superior children versus nongifted peers as estimated by chronic anxiety levels. School Psychology Review, 12, 190–194.Google Scholar
  76. Rieffe, C., Meerum Terwogt, M., & Bosch, J. D. (2004). Emotional awareness and somatic complaints in children. European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 1, 31–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Rieffe, C., Meerum Terwogt, M., Petrides, K. V., Cowan, C., Miers, A. C., & Tolland, A. (2007). Psychometric properties of the Emotion Awareness Questionnaire for children. Personality and Individual Differences, 43, 95–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Rimm, S. (1990). How to parent so children will learn. Watertown, WI: Apple Publishing.Google Scholar
  79. Roedell, W. C. (1984). Vulnerabilities of highly gifted children. Roeper Review, 6, 127–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Roedell, W. C. (1986). Socioemotional vulnerabilities of young children. In J. R. Whitmore (Ed.), Intellectual giftedness in young children: Recognition and development (pp. 17–29). New York: The Haworth Press Inc.Google Scholar
  81. Rogers, K. B. (1991). The relationship of grouping practices to the education of the gifted and talented learner (RBDM 9102). Storrs, CT: The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented, University of Connecticut.Google Scholar
  82. Rogers, K. B. (2002). Re-forming gifted education: Matching the program to the child. Scottsdale, AZ: Great Potential Press.Google Scholar
  83. Rogers, K. B., & Kimpston, R. D. (1992). Acceleration: What we do vs. what we know. Educational Leadership, 50, 58–61.Google Scholar
  84. Schmitz, C., & Galbraith, J. (1985). Managing the social and emotional needs of the gifted. Minneapolis, MN: Free Spirit Publishing.Google Scholar
  85. Seeley, K. R. (1984). Perspective on adolescent giftedness and delinquency. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 8, 59–72.Google Scholar
  86. Silverman, L. K. (1994). The moral sensitivity of gifted children and the evolution of society. Roeper Review, 17, 110–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Silverman, L. K. (1997). The construct of asynchronous development. Journal of Education, 72, 36–58.Google Scholar
  88. Silverman, L. K., & Kearney, K. (1989). Parents of the extraordinarily gifted. Advanced Development Journal, 1, 41–56.Google Scholar
  89. Slavin, R. E. (1987). Ability grouping and student achievement in elementary schools: Best evidence synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 57, 293–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Smits, J. A. E., & Vorst, H. C. M. (1990). Schoolvragenlijst voor basisonderwijs en voortgezet onderwijs. Nijmegen, Nederland: Berkhout.Google Scholar
  91. Smits, J. A. E., Vorst, H. C. M., & Universiteit van Amsterdam. (2008). SchoolVragenLijst. Amsterdam: Pearson.Google Scholar
  92. Southern, W. T., Jones, E. D., & Fiscus, E. D. (1989). Practitioner objections to the academic acceleration of gifted children. Gifted Child Quarterly, 33, 29–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Tolan, S. S. (1985). Stuck in another dimension: The exceptionally gifted child in school. G/C/T, 41, 22–26.Google Scholar
  94. Van Kessels, A. (2009). Topdown leren onmogelijk uit te leggen; als je niet weet wat bottom- up leren is. Retrieved on 22/12/1012 from: http://home.planet.nl/~heuve533/topdown.pdf.
  95. Van Tassel-Baska, J. (2000). Theory and research on curriculum development for the gifted. In K. A. Heller, F. J. Mönks, R. J. Sternberg, & R. F. Subotnik (Eds.), International handbook of giftedness and talent (2nd ed., pp. 345–365). New York: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  96. Vaughn, V., Feldhusen, J. F., & Asher, J. W. (1991). Meta-analysis and review of research on pull-out programs in gifted education. Gifted Child Quarterly, 35, 92–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Veerman, J. W., Straathof, M. A. E., & Treffers, P. D. A. (1994). Handleiding Competentiebelevingsschaal voor Kinderen, CBSK. Duivendrecht: Paedologisch Instituut.Google Scholar
  98. Webb, J. T. (1993). Nurturing social–emotional development of gifted children. In K. A. Heller, F. J. Mönks, & A. H. Passow (Eds.), International handbook of research and development of giftedness and talent (pp. 525–538). Oxford, England: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
  99. Webb, J. T., Amend, E. R., Webb, N. E., Goerss, J., Beljan, P., & Olenchak, F. R. (2005). Misdiagnosis and dual diagnoses of gifted children and adults: ADHD, Bipolar, OCD, Asperger’s, Depression, and other disorders. Scottsdale, AZ: Great Potential Press.Google Scholar
  100. Webb, J. T., Gore, J. L., Amend, E. R., & DeVries, A. R. (2007). A parent’s guide to gifted children. Scottsdale, AZ: Great Potential Press.Google Scholar
  101. Whitmore, J. R. (1980). Giftedness, conflict and underachievement. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
  102. Whitmore, J. R. (1986). Understanding a lack of motivation to excel. Gifted Child Quarterly, 30, 66–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. Winebrenner, S. (2000). Gifted students need an education, too. Educational leadership, 58, 52–56.Google Scholar
  104. Yalom, I. D. (1980). Existential psychotherapy. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  105. Zeidner, M., & Schleyer, E. J. (1998). The Big-Fish–Little-Pond effect for academic self-concept, test anxiety, and school grades in gifted children. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 24, 305–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rachel T. van der Meulen
    • 1
  • Corine O. van der Bruggen
    • 2
    • 4
  • Jantine L. Spilt
    • 2
    • 5
  • Jaap Verouden
    • 3
  • Maria Berkhout
    • 3
  • Susan M. Bögels
    • 2
  1. 1.UvA Minds Academic Treatment Centre for Parent and ChildAmsterdamThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Research Institute Child Development and EducationUniversity of AmsterdamAmsterdamThe Netherlands
  3. 3.ABC Educational AdvisorsAmsterdamThe Netherlands
  4. 4.Triversum Centre for Child and Youth PsychiatryAlkmaarThe Netherlands
  5. 5.Department of Developmental PsychologyVU UniversityAmsterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations