Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Connecting Student Engagement to the Academic and Social Needs of Gifted and Talented Students

  • Chapter
Creatively Gifted Students are not like Other Gifted Students

Part of the book series: Advances in Creativity and Giftedness ((ACAG,volume 5))

Abstract

Over the past 20 years, student engagement has become an increasingly popular construct within the world of education. Recent research provides considerable evidence that engagement is a key component of student academic success, yet the role of engagement with gifted and talented students has received much less attention.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 49.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Adams-Byers, J., Whitsell, S. S., & Moon, S. M. (2004). Gifted students’ perceptions of the academic and social/emotional effects of homogeneous and heterogeneous grouping. Gifted Child Quarterly, 48(1), 7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alexander, J. M., Carr, M., & Schwanenflugel, P. J. (1995). Development of metacognition in gifted children: Directions for future research. Developmental Review, 15(1), 1–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, A. R., Christenson, S. L., Sinclair, M. F., & Lehr, C. A. (2004). Check & connect: The importance of relationships for promoting engagement with school. Journal of School Psychology, 42(2), 95–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Armstrong, D. C. (1994). A gifted child’s education requires real dialogue: The use of interactive writing for collaborative education. Gifted Child Quartely, 38(3), 136–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Appleton, J. A., Christenson, S. L., & Furlong, M. J. (2008). Student engagement with school: Critical conceptual and methodological issues of the construct. Psychology in the Schools, 45(5), 369–386.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Appleton, J. A., Christenson, S. L., Kim, D., & Reschly, A. L. (2006). Measuring cognitive and psychological engagement: Validation of the Student Engagement Instrument. Journal of School Psychology, 44, 427–445.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. (2007). The whole child initiative. Retrieved March 30, 2010, from http://www.wholechildeducation.org/

  • Baker, L. A., Vernon, P. A., & Ho, H.-Z. (1991). The genetic correlation between intelligence and speed of information processing. Behavior Genetics, 21(4), 351–367.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bates, J., & Munday, S. (2005). Able, gifted, and talented. New York: Continuum International Publishing Group.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beishuizen, J. J., Hof, E., van Putten, C. M., Bouwmeester, S., & Asscher, J. J. (2001). Students’ and teachers’ cognitions about good teachers. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 185–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Betts, G. T., & Neihart, M. (1988). Profiles of the gifted and talented. Gifted Child Quarterly, 32, 248–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bishop, P. A., & Pflaum, S. W. (2005). Student perceptions of action, relevance, and pace. Middle School Journal, 36(4), 4–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blum, R. W. (2005). A case for school connectedness. Educational Leadership, 62(7), 16–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, J. L. (2008). Educating the whole child. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brumback, C. R., Low, K. A., Gratton, G., & Fabiani, M. C. A. (2004). Sensory ERPs predict differences in working memory span and fluid intelligence. Neuroreport, 15(2), 373–376.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butler-Por, N. (1987). Underachievers in school. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Callahan, C. (2006). Assessment in the classroom: The key to good instruction. Waco, TX: Prufrock Press, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carr, M., & Alexander, J. (1996). Where gifted children do and do not excel on metacognitive tasks. Roeper Review, 18(3), 212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2009). School connectedness: Strategies for increasing protective factors among youth. Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christenson, S. L., & Thurlow, M. L. (2004). School dropouts: Prevention considerations, interventions, and challenges. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 13(1), 36–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colangelo, N., Assouline, S., & Gross, M. (2004). A nation deceived: How school should back America’s brightest students (Vol. I and II). Iowa City, IA: University of Iowa Belin-Blank Center.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coleman, L. J., & Cross, T. L. (2001). Being gifted in school: An introduction to development, guidance, and teaching. Waco: Prufrock Press, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Croninger, R. G., & Lee, V. E. (2001). Social capital and dropping out of high school: Benefits to at-risk students of teachers’ support and guidance. Teachers College Record, 103(4), 548.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daurio, S. P. (1979). Educational enrichment versus acceleration: A review of the literature. In George, W. C., Cohn, S. J., & Stanley, J. C. (Eds.), Educating the gifted, acceleration and enrichment. (pp. 13–53). Baltimore, MD: The John Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diket, R. M., & Abel, T. H. (2001). Metacognitive instrument for tracking graduate student learning in gifted education. Gifted Child Quarterly, 45(1), 24–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dolezal, S. E., Welsh, L. M., Pressley, M., & Vincent, M. M. (2003). How nine third-grade teachers motivate student academic engagement. The Elementary School Journal, 103(3), 239–267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dowdall, C. B., & Colangelo, N. (1982). Underachieving gifted students: Review and implications. Gifted Child Quarterly, 26, 179–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eccles, J. S., Early, D., Fraser, K., Belansky, E., & McCarthy, K. (1997). The relation of connection, regulation, and support for autonomy to adolescents’ functioning. Journal of Adolescent Research, 12(2), 263–286.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eccles, J. S., Midgley, C., Wigfield, A., Buchanan, C. M., Reuman, D., Flanagan, C., et al. (1993). Development during adolescence: The impact of stage-environment fit on young adolescents’ experiences in schools and in families. American Psychologist, 48(2), 90–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Emerick, L. J. (1992). Academic underachievement among the gifted: Students’ perceptions of factors that reverse the pattern. Gifted Child Quarterly, 36, 140–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Farkas, S., & Duffett, A. (2008). “Results from a national teacher survey.” In High achieving students in the era of NCLB (pp. 49–82). Washington, DC: Thomas B. Fordham Institute

    Google Scholar 

  • Finn, J. D. (1989). Withdrawing from school. Review of Educational Research, 59(2), 117–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finn, J. D. (1993). School engagement and students at risk. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finn, J. D., Pannozzo, G. M., & Voelkl, K. E. (1995). Disruptive and inattentive-withdrawn behavior and achievement among fourth graders. The Elementary School Journal, 95(5), 421–434.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finn, J. D., & Rock, D. A. (1997). Academic success among students at risk for school failure. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(2), 221–234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • French, J. L. (1969). Characteristics of high Ability dropouts. NASSP Bulletin, 53, 67–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gallagher, J., Harradine, C., & Coleman, M. (1997). Challenge or boredom? Gifted students’ views on their schooling. Roeper Review, 19(3), 132–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodenow, C. (1993). Classroom belonging among early adolescent students: Relationships to motivation and achievement. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 13(1), 21–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoffman, J. L., Wasson, F. R., & Christianson, B. P. (1985). Personal development for the gifted underachiever. Gifted Child Today, 8, 12–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jausovec, N. (2000). Differences in cognitive processes between gifted, intelligent, creative, and average individuals while solving complex problems: An EEG study. Intelligence, 28(3), 213–237.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, E. (2006). Enriching the brain: How to maximize every learner’s potential. San Francisco: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jimerson, S. R., Campos, E., & Greif, J. L. (2003). Toward an understanding of definitions and measures of school engagement and related terms. California School Psychologist, 8, 7–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kanevsky, L., & Keighley, T. (2003). To produce or not to produce? Understanding boredom and the honor in underachievement. Roeper Review, 26(1), 20–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klem, A. M., & Connell, J. P. (2004). Relationships matter: Linking teacher support to student engagement and achievement. Journal of School Health, 74(7), 262–273.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kulik, J. A. (1993). Meta analytic findings on groping programs. Gifted Child Quarterly, 36, 73–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leahy, S., Lyon, C., Thompson, M., & William, D. (2005). Classroom assessment: Minute by minute, day by day. Educational Leadership, 63(3), 18–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Learner, D. G., & Kruger, L. J. (1997). Attachment, self-concept, and academic motivation in high-school students. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 67(3), 485–492.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levy, J. L., & Pluc ker, J. A. (2008, January 31). A multicultural competence model for counseling gifted and talented children. Journal of School Counseling, 6 (4). Retrieved from www.jsc.montana.edu/articles/v6n4.pdf

  • Linnenbrink, E. A., & Pintrich, P. R. (2003). The role of self-efficacy beliefs in student engagement and learning in the classroom. Reading and Writing Quarterly: Overcoming Learning Difficulties, 19, 119–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mahoney, J. L., & Cairns, R. B. (1997). Do extracurricular activities protect against early school dropout? Developmental Psychology, 33(2), 241–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marks, H. M. (2000). Student engagement in instructional activity: Patterns in the elementary, middle, and high school years. American Educational Research Journal, 37(1), 153–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDermott, P. A., Mordell, M., & Stoltzfus, J. C. (2001). The organization of student performance in American schools: Discipline, motivation, verbal learning, nonverbal learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(1), 65–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McNeely, C. A., Nonnemaker, J. M., & Blum, R. W. (2002). Promoting school connectedness: evidence from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health. Journal of School Health, 72(4), 138–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moon, S. M. (2009). Myth 15: High-ability students don’t face problems and challenges. Gifted Child Quarterly, 53(4), 174–276.

    Google Scholar 

  • Munns, G., & Woodward, H. (2006). Student engagement and student self-assessment: The REAL framework. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice, 13(2), 193.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neihart, M., Reis, S. M., Robinson, N. M., & Moon, S. M. (2002). The social and emotional development of gifted children: What do we know? Waco, Texas: Prufrock Press, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newmann, F. M., Wehlage, G. G., & Lamborn, S. D. (1992). The significance and sources of student engagement. In F. M. Newmann (Ed.), Student engagment and achievement in american secondary schools (pp. 11–39). New York: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osterman, K. F. (2000). Students’ need for belonging in the school community. Review of Educational Research, 70(3), 323–367.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pashler, H., McDaniel, M., Rohrer, D., & Bjork, R. (2009). Learning styles: Concepts and evidence. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 9, 105–119.

    Google Scholar 

  • Plucker, J. A., Burroughs, N., Song, R. (2010). Mind the (other) gap! Bloomington, IN: Center for Evaluation and Education Policy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Plucker, J., & McIntire, J. (1996). Academic survivability in high potential, middle school students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 40, 7–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plucker, J. A., Robinson, N. M., Greenspon, T. S., Feldhusen, J., McCoach, D. B., & Subotnik, R. (2004). It’s not how the pond makes you feel, but rather how high you can jump. American Psychologist, 59, 268–269.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prescott, J., Gavrilescu, M., Cunnington, R., O’Boyle, M., & Egan, G. (2010). Enhanced brain connectivity in math-gifted adolescents: An fMRI study using mental rotation. Cognitive Neuroscience, 1(4), 277–288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reis, S. M., & McCoach, D. B. (2000). The underachievement of gifted students: What do we know and where do we go? Gifted Child Quarterly, 44(3), 152–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reis, S. M., & Renzulli, J. S. (1992). Using curriculum compacting to challenge the above-average. Educational Leadership, 50(2), 51–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reis, S. M., Westberg, K. L., Kulikowich, J., Caillard, F., Hebert, T., Plucker, J., Pucell, J. H., Roger, J. B., & Smist, J. M. (1993). Why not let high ability students start school in January? The curriculum compacting study. Monograph of the National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented, 93106.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reis, S. M., & McCoach, D. B. (2002). Underachievement in gifted students. In M. Neihart, S. M. Reis, N. M. Robinson & S. M. Moon (Eds.), The social and emotional development of gifted children: What do we know? (pp. 81–91). Waco, Texas: Prufrock Press, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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(1), 119–130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Renzulli, J. S., Smith, L. H., & Reis, S. M. (1982). Curriculum compacting: An essential strategy for working with gifted students. The Elementary School Journal, 82(3), 185–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Renzulli, J. S. (2002). Emerging conceptions of giftedness: Building a bridge to the new century. Exceptionality, 10(2), 67–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Renzulli, J. S., & Park, S. (2000). Gifted dropouts: The who and the why. Gifted Child Quarterly, 44(4), 261–271.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Resnick, M. D., Bearman, P. S., Blum, R. W., Bauman, K. E., Harris, K. M., Jones, J., et al. (1997). Protecting adolescents from harm: Findings from the national longitudinal study on adolescent health. JAMA, 278(10), 823–832.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robertson, E. (1991). Neglected dropouts: The gifted and talented. Equity and Excellence, 25, 62–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, A., & Clinkenbeard, P. R. (1998). Giftedness: An exceptionality examined. Annual Review of Psychology, 49(1), 117–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scherer, M. (Ed.). (2009). Engaging the whole child: Reflections on best practices in learning, teaching, and leadership. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schuler, P. (2002). Perfectionism in gifted children and adolescents. In M. Neihart, S. M. Reis, N. M. Robinson & S. M. Moon (Eds.), The social and emotional development of gifted children: What do we know? (pp. 71–77). Waco, Texas: Prufrock Press, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schultz, R.A. (2002). Understanding giftedness and underachievement: At the edge of possibility. Gifted Child Quarterly, 46(3), 193–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silverman, L. K. (2002). Asynchronous development. In M. Neihart, S. M. Reis, N. M. Robinson & S. M. Moon (Eds.), The social and emotional development of gifted children: What do we know? (pp. 31–37). Waco, Texas: Prufrock Press, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singh, H., & W. O’Boyle, M. (2004). Interhemispheric interaction during global-local processing in mathematically gifted adolescents, average-ability youth, and college students. Neuropsychology, 18(2), 371–377.

    Google Scholar 

  • Speirs-Neumeister, K. L., Adams, C. M., Pierce, R. L., Cassady, J. C., & Dixon, F. A. (2007). Fourthgrade teachers’ perceptions of giftedness: Implications for identifying and serving diverse gifted students. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 30(4), 479–499.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stanley, J. C. (2000). Helping students learn only what they don’t already know. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 6(1), 216–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sternberg, R. (1997). What does it mean to be smart? Educational Leadership, 55(7), 20–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sternberg, R., Torff, B., & Grigorenko, E. (1997). Are cognitive styles still in style? American Psychologist, 52, 700–712.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tomlinson, C. A. (1996). Good teaching for one and all: Does gifted education have an instructional identity? Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 20(2), 155–174.

    Google Scholar 

  • VanTassel-Baska, J., & Brown, E. F. (2007). Toward best practice: An analysis of the efficacy of curriculum models in gifted education. Gifted Child Quarterly, 51, 342–359.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Voelkl, K. E. (1995). School warmth, student participation, and achievement. Journal of Experimental Education, 63(2), 127–138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wentzel, K. R. (1997). Student motivation in middle school: The role of perceived pedagogical caring. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89(3), 411–419.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Willms, J. D. (2003). Student engagement at school: A sense of belonging and participation. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wolfe, F., & Brodie, J. M. (July 24, 2009). Whole child movement. Experts: Student-teacher bond affects achievement. Education Daily, p. 2

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. K. M. McCormick
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. J. A. Plucker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. College of William and Mary, Virginia, USA

    Kyung Hee Kim

  2. California State University, San Bernardino, USA

    James C. Kaufman

  3. Rider University, New Jersey, USA

    John Baer

  4. The University of Montana, USA

    Bharath Sriraman

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Sense Publishers

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

McCormick, K.M., Plucker, J.A. (2013). Connecting Student Engagement to the Academic and Social Needs of Gifted and Talented Students. In: Kim, K.H., Kaufman, J.C., Baer, J., Sriraman, B. (eds) Creatively Gifted Students are not like Other Gifted Students. Advances in Creativity and Giftedness, vol 5. SensePublishers, Rotterdam. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6209-149-8_9

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Societies and partnerships

Search

Navigation