Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Teaching mathematically talented students: a cross-cultural study about their teachers’ views

  • Published:
Educational Studies in Mathematics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The instruction of mathematically talented students (MTS) in heterogeneous classes is an issue of debate. Questions of equity, differential instruction, teacher awareness of their talented students’ needs, and their willingness and competence to face the challenges of nurturing these students are all raised within this context. Our international study compared South Korean, American, and Israeli teachers of mathematics perspectives concerning their (a) perceived competence to teach MTS (b) perceived competence in addressing MTS’ needs through differential instruction, (c) support for separation of MTS into special math classes, and (d) equity views concerning MTS’ needs. Data was collected by means of a questionnaire presented to 80 South Korean, 145 Israeli, and 58 American teachers of mathematics. Findings suggested that most teachers in these countries perceived themselves as competent to teach MTS, while very few of the participants supported the separation of MTS into special classes. South Korean teachers perceived themselves to be less competent in teaching MTS as well as in applying differential instruction and agreed more than their foreign counterparts that the fostering of mathematically weak students is more important than the fostering of MTS. Teachers who had some mathematical background appeared to perceive themselves as more competent to teach MTS than teachers who had no mathematical background. Teachers who predominantly taught large classes felt less competent to teach MTS than teachers who predominantly taught medium-sized classes. Findings were partially interpreted within the perspective of cultural differences. Recommendations for teachers’ professional development are drawn.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. For explanation of the terms “gifted” and “talented”, see next section.

  2. For instance, one step for improvement consisted in removing the statements related to qualities required from a teacher of MTS (e.g., “in order to teach MTS, the teacher needs wide mathematical knowledge” or “in order to teach MTS, the teacher needs high ability in solving complex mathematics problems”) for defective factor loading reasons. Similar to the Israeli teachers in the research of Applebaum, Freiman and Leikin (2011), the Israeli teachers in our original research revealed high agreement with teachers’ need of high abilities in order to teach MTS, yet according to factor analyses (which was not performed in the above-mentioned study), the teachers’ answers were seemingly not enough related to each other to load together to one independent factor.

References

  • Applebaum, M., Freiman, V., & Leikin, R. (2011). Prospective conceptions about teaching mathematically talented students: Comparative examples from Canada and Israel. The Montana Mathematics Enthusiast, 8(1-2), 255–290.

  • Archambault, F., Westberg, K., Brown, S., Hallmark, B., Emmons, C., & Zhang, W. (1993). Regular classroom practices with gifted students: Results of a national survey of classroom teachers (Research monograph 93102). Storrs: University of Connecticut, National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented.

  • Armor, D., Conroy-Oseguera, P., Cox, M., King, N., McDonnell, L., …, & Zellman, G. (1976). Analysis of the school preferred reading programs in selected Los Angeles minority schools. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.

  • Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, NY: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Balas, N. & Romanov, D. (2010). Uniformity of teachers’ salaries, their relative status compared to other employees. Retrieved from http://taubcenter.org.il/tauborgilwp/wpcontent/uploads/H2101.13_Teacher_Salaries.pdf . Hebrew.

  • Bandura, A. (1989). Human agency in social-cognitive theory. American Psychologist, 44(9), 1175–1184.

  • Bénabou, R., & Tirole, J. (2002). Self-confidence and personal motivation. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 117(3), 871–915.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bergman, P., McLaughlin, M., Bass, M., Pauly, E., & Zellman, G. (1977). Federal programs supporting educational change: Vol. VII. Factors affecting implementation and continuation. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blatchford, P., Bassett, P., & Brown, P. (2008). Do low attaining and younger students benefit most from small classes? Results from a systematic observation study of class size effects on pupil classroom engagement and teacher pupil interaction. Paper to symposium, Class size effects: New insights into classroom, school and policy processes, presented at American Educational Research Association Annual Meeting, New York.

  • Blozowich, D. G. (2001). Differentiated instruction in heterogeneously grouped sixth grade classrooms (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Immaculata College, Pennsylvania.

  • Boaler, J., William, D., & Brown, M. (2000). Students’ experiences of ability grouping: Disaffection, polarisation and the construction of failure. British Educational Research Journal, 26(5), 631–648.

  • Bong, M., & Skaalvik, E. M. (2003). Academic self-concept and self-efficacy: How different are they really? Educational Psychology Review, 15(1), 1–40.

  • Bulgar, S. (2008). Enabling more students to achieve mathematical success. In B. Sriraman (Ed.), Creativity, giftedness and talent development in mathematics (pp. 133–154). Charlotte: Information Age Publishing.

  • Callahan, C., Tomlinson, C., Moon, T., Brighton, C., & Hertberg, H. (2003). Feasibility of high end learning in the middle grades. Charlottesville: University of Virginia, National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cho, S., & Lin, C. (2009). Preparation of gifted education teachers in collaboration of higher education institutions in New-York. Asia-Pacific Journal of Gifted and Talented Education, 1(1), 9–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cho, Y., Mallinckrodt, B., & Yune, S. (2010). Collectivism and individualism as bicultural values: South Korean undergraduates’ adjustment to college. Asian Journal of Counselling, 17(1-2), 81–104.

  • Choi, N. (2005). Self-efficacy and self-concept as predictors of college students’ academic performance. Psychology in the Schools, 42(2), 197–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colen, Y. S. (2006, December–2007, January). A call for early intervention for mathematically gifted elementary students: A Russian model. Teaching Children Mathematics, 13(5), 280–284.

  • Cramond, B., & Martin, C. E. (1987). Inservice and preservice teachers’ attitudes toward the academically brilliant. Gifted Child Quarterly, 31(1), 15–19.

  • Darden, E. C. (2011). Should master’s degrees matter? Forecast, 9(2). Retrieved 28.6.11 from http://www.nyssba.org/clientuploads/forecast%20pdf/forecast0511.pdf

  • Darling-Hammond, L., Wise, A., & Klein, S. (1999). A license to teach: Raising standards for teaching. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diezmann, C., & Watters, J. (2002a). Summing up the education of mathematically gifted students. In B. Barton, K.C. Irwin, M. Pfannkuch, & M. O. J. Thomas (Eds.), Mathematics education in the South Pacific: Proceedings of the 25th annual conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia, Auckland (pp. 219–226). Sydney: MERGA.

  • Diezmann, C., & Watters, J. (2002b). The importance of challenging tasks for mathematically gifted students. Gifted and Talented International, 17(2), 76–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ewing, M., Moskal, B., & Fairweather, G. (2007). Mathematical problem solving: A comparative analysis between the US and Korea. The International Journal of Learning, 14(8), 267–273.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feldhusen, J. (1989). Synthesis of research on gifted youth. Educational Leadership, 54(6), 6–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fiedler, E. D., Lange, R. E., & Winebrenner, S. (2002). In search of reality: Unraveling the myths about tracking, ability grouping and the gifted. Roeper Review, 24(3), 108–111. Retrieved 17.08.2011 from FindArticles.com. http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_hb6470/is_3_24/ai_n28919731/.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gal, H., Levenson, E., Shayshon, B., Tesler, B., Eyal, T., Prusak, N., & Berger, S. (2008). From one end to the other: Raising teachers’ awareness of mathematically-talented students in mixed-ability classes. In E. Velikova & A. Andzans (Eds.), Proceedings of the DG 9: Promoting Creativity for All Students in Mathematics Education: International Congress on Mathematical Education 11 (pp. 141–149). Monterrey, Mexico.

  • Gamoran, A., & Weinstein, M. (1995). Differentiation and opportunity in restructured schools. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED386828)

  • Gibson, S., & Dembo, H. M. (1984). Teacher efficacy: A construct validation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76(4), 569–582.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenberg, J. & Walsh, K. (2008). No common denominator: The preparation of elementary teachers in mathematics by America’s education schools. National Council on Teacher Quality. Retrieved 19.08.2011 from http://www.nctq.org/p/publications/docs/nctq_ttmath_fullreport_20080626115953.pdf

  • Gross, M. U. M. (1993). Exceptionally gifted children. London: Routledge Falmer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Gross, M. (1999). Small poppies: Highly gifted children in the early years. Roeper Review, 21(3), 207–214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hallam, S., & Ireson, J. (2003). Secondary school teachers’ attitudes towards and beliefs about ability grouping. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 73(3), 343–356.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hamamura, T., Heine, S. J., & Paulhus, D. L. (2008). Cultural differences in response styles: The role of dialectical thinking. Personality and Individual Differences, 44(4), 932–942.

  • Heine, S. J., Lehman, D. R., & Peng, K. (2002). What’s wrong with cross-cultural comparisons of subjective Likert scales?: The reference-group effect. Journal of Personality and Psychology, 82(6), 903–918.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heine, S. J., Takata, T., & Lehman, D. R. (2000). Beyond self-presentation: Evidence for self-criticism among Japanese. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26(1), 71–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hertberg, H. (2003). The influence of training on middle school teachers’ writing instruction (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Virginia, Charlottesville.

  • Holton, D., Cheung, K-C., Kesianye, S., de Losada, M. F., Leikin, R., Makrides, G., & Yeap, B. (2009). Teacher development and mathematical challenge. In E. Barbeau & P. Taylor (Eds.), Challenging mathematics in and beyond classroom. New ICMI study series: The 16th ICMI study (Vol. 12, pp. 205–242). New York: Springer.

  • Hofstede, G. H. (1980). Culture’s consequences: International differences in work-related values. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holton, D., Cheung, K-C., Kesianye, S., de Losada, M. F., Leikin, R., Makrides, G., & Yaep, B. (2009). Teacher development and mathematical challenge. In: E. J. Barbeau & P. J. Taylor (Eds.). Challenging mathematics in and beyond classroom. The 16th ICMI Study (Vol. 12). Springer.

  • Hootstein, E. (1998). Differentiation of instructional methodologies in subject-based curricula at the secondary level. Richmond, VA: Metropolitan Educational Research Consortium. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED427130).

  • Ingersoll, R. M. (Ed.). (2007). A comparative study of teacher preparation and qualifications in six nations (CPRE Research Report No. RR-57). University of Pennsylvania: CPRE.

  • Ingersoll, R. M., & Curran, B. K. (2004). Out-of-field teaching: The great obstacle to meeting the “highly qualified” teacher challenge. Washington, DC: National Governors’ Association Center for Best Practices.

  • Ingersoll, R. & Gruber, K. (1996). Out-of-field teaching and educational quality: Statistical analysis report. Washington, DC: National Center for Educational Statistics.

  • Jackson, A., & Davis, G. (2000). Turning points 2000: Educating adolescents in the 21st century. New York: Teachers College Press.

  • Johnston, D. (2011). Three changes for education. ELS 760 Process of Change. Retrieved 13.04.13 from: http://meetdebjohnston.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/Educational-changes.pdf

  • Judson, E. (2006). How teachers integrate technology and their beliefs about learning: Is there a connection? Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 14(3), 581–597.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klassen, R., & Chiu, M. (2010). Effects on teachers’ self-efficacy and job satisfaction: Teacher gender, years of experience, and job stress. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(3), 741–756.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klassen, R., Usher, E., & Bong, M. (2010). Teachers’ collective efficacy, job satisfaction, and job stress in cross-cultural context. The Journal of Experimental Education, 78(4), 464–486.

  • Knobel, R., & Shaughnessey, M. (2002). Reflecting on a conversation with Joe Renzulli: About giftedness and gifted education. Gifted Education International, 16(2), 118–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ko, M. S., & Park, B. T. (2011). Difference on identification of gifted students by level of perception of teacher’s professionalism in gifted education. Journal of Gifted/Talented Education, 21(2), 427–447.

    Google Scholar 

  • Korean Educational Development Institute. (2009). 영재교육기관 맞춤형 컨설팅활성화 방안 연구 (CR2009-53). Seoul, Korea: Korean Educational Development Institute. Korean.

    Google Scholar 

  • Korean Educational Development Institute. (2011). 지식기반경제에서의 창조형 인재양성을 위한 교육개혁의 방향과 과제 (CR2011-02). Seoul, Korea: Korean Educational Development Institute. Korean.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kramarski, B. & Mevarech, Z. R. (2004). Reading, mathematics and science literacy: PISA 2002 study. Jerusalem: The National Authority for Measurement and Evaluation in Education (RAMA). (Hebrew). Retrieved 15.09.10 from http://cms.education.gov.il/EducationCMS/Units/Rama/MivchanimBenLeumiyim/OdotPisa.htm

  • Krieg, M. J. (2008). Are students left behind? The distributional effects of the no child left behind act. Educational Finance and Policy, 3(2), 250–281.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krutetskii, V. A. (1976). The psychology of mathematical abilities in school children. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kulik, I. A., & Kulik, C. C. (1984). Synthesis of research on effects of accelerated instruction. Educational Leadership, 42(2), 84–89.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lassig, C. J. (2003). Gifted and talented education reforms: Effects on teachers’ attitudes. In B. Bartlett, F. Bryer, & D. Roebuck (Eds.), Reimagining Practice, Researching Change: Proceedings 1st Annual International Conference on Cognition, Language, and Special Education Research (Vol. 2, pp. 141–152). Surfers Paradise, QLD: Australian Academic Press.

  • Lassig, C. J. (2009). Teachers’ attitudes towards the gifted: The importance of professional development and school culture. Australasian Journal of Gifted Education, 18(2), 32–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leikin, R., & Stanger, O. (2011). Teachers’ images of gifted students and the role assigned to them in heterogeneous mathematics classes. In B. Sriraman & K. W. Lee (Eds.), The elements of creativity and giftedness in mathematics (pp. 103–118). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.

  • Leung, F. K. S., & Park, K. M. (2002). Competent students, competent teachers? International Journal of Educational Research, 37(2), 113–129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin, H.-L., Gorrell, J., & Taylor, J. (2002). Influence of culture and education on U.S. and Taiwan preservice teachers’ efficacy beliefs. The Journal of Educational Research, 96(1), 37–46.

  • Little, J. W. (1995). Subject affiliation in high schools that restructure. In L. Santee Siskin & J. W. Little (Eds.), The subjects in question: Departmental organization in the high school (pp. 172–200). New York: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ma, L. (1999). Knowing and teaching elementary mathematics. Mahwah, N.J: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Markus, H., & Wurf, E. (1987). The dynamic self-concept: A social psychological perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, 38, 299–337.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marsh, H. W., Craven, R., & Debus, R. (1999). Separation of competency and affect components of multiple dimensions of academic self-concept: A developmental perspective. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 45(4), 567–601.

  • Matthews, L. E. (2005). Toward design of clarifying equity messages in mathematics reform. The High School Journal, 88(4), 46–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCoach, D. B., & Siegle, D. (2007). What predicts teachers’ attitudes toward the gifted? Gifted Child Quarterly, 51(3), 246–255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McLeod, J., & Cropley, A. (1989). Creativity, intelligence and academic excellence. Fostering academic excellence (pp. 58–78). Oxford: Pergamon Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Megay-Nespoli, K. (2001). Beliefs and attitudes of novice teachers regarding instruction of academically talented learners. Roeper Review, 23(3), 178–182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meier, D. (1995). The power of their ideas: Lessons for America from a small school in Harlem. Boston: Beacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mulhern, J. D. (2003). The gifted child in the regular classroom. Roeper Review, 25(3), 112–115.

  • Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., Foy, P., & Arora, A. (2012). TIMSS 2011 international results in mathematics. Chestnut Hill, MA: TIMSS and PIRLS International Study Center, Boston College.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O. & Foy, P. (2008). TIMSS 2007 international mathematics report: Findings from IEA’s Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study at the fourth and eighth grades. Chestnut Hill, MA: TIMSS and PIRLS International Study Center, Boston College.

  • National Association for Gifted Children (NAGC). (2008). Standards in gifted & talented education. Retrieved from http://www.nagc.org/index.aspx?id=1863

  • OECD (2010a). PISA 2009 results: What students know and can do. Volume 1. OECD. Retrieved 19.08.2011 from http://browse.oecdbookshop.org/oecd/pdfs/free/9810071e.pdf

  • OECD (2010b). PISA 2009 results: learning trends: changes in student performance since 2000. Volume 5. OECD. Retrieved 19.08.2011 from http://browse.oecdbookshop.org/oecd/pdfs/free/9810111e.pdf

  • OECD (2010c). Education at a glance 2010: OECD indicators. OECD. Retrieved 29.6.11 from http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/45/39/45926093.pdf

  • Pajares, F. (1992). Teachers beliefs and educational research: Cleaning up a messy construct. Review of Educational Research, 62(3), 307–332.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park, K. (2004a). Gifted education in Korea. In: Korea sub-commission of ICMI (Eds.). The report on mathematics education in Korea. Copenhagen: The Korean presentation at ICMI 10.

  • Park, K. (2004b). Factors contributing to Korean students’ high achievement in mathematics. In: Korea sub-commission of ICMI (Eds.), The report on mathematics education in Korea. Copenhagen: The Korean presentation at ICMI 10.

  • Park, C., & Seo, H. A. (2010). Legal imperatives related to teacher certification in gifted education. Journal of Gifted/Talented Education, 20(1), 231–256.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peng, K., Nisbett, R. E., & Wong, N. (1997). Validity problems comparing value across cultures and possible solutions. Psychological Methods, 2(4), 329–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rachmel, S. (2007). The new policy for promoting education for outstanding and gifted students in Israel. In P. Csermely, K. Korlevic & K. Sulyok (Eds.), Science education: Models and networking of student research training under 21. NATO security science series E: Human and social dynamics (Vol. 16, pp. 130-139). Amsterdam: IOS Press.

  • Renzulli, J. S. (2008, March/April). Teach the top: How to keep high achievers engaged and motivated. [Cover story]. Instructor, 117(5), 34. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ794620.pdf.

  • Renzulli, J. S., Baum, S. M., Hebert, T., & McCluskey, K. W. (1999). Reversing underachievement through enrichment. Reclaiming Children and Youth, 7(4), 217–223.

    Google Scholar 

  • Renzulli, J. S., & Reis, S. M. (1997). Giftedness in middle school students: A talent development perspective. In P. S. George, J. S. Renzulli, S. M. Reis, & T. O. Erb (Eds.), Dilemmas in talent development in the middle grades: Two views (pp. 43–112). Columbus, OH: National Middle School Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, J. K., Henson, K. R., Tharp, Z. B., & Moreno, P. N. (2001). An examination of change in teacher self-efficacy beliefs in science education based on the duration of inservice activities. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 12(3), 199–213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenberg, M. (1979). Conceiving the self. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, W., Tatto, M., Bankov, K., Blömeke, S., Cedillo, T., Cogan, N., & Schwille, J. (2007). The preparation gap: Teacher education for middle school mathematics in six countries. Mathematics teaching in the 21st century. Michigan State University: Center for Research in Mathematics and Science Education. Retrieved from http://usteds.msu.edu/MT21Report.pdf.

  • Schumm, J., & Vaughn, S. (1991). Making adaptations for mainstreamed students: General classroom teachers’ perspectives. Remedial and Special Education, 12(4), 18–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schumm, J., & Vaughn, S. (1995). Getting ready for inclusion: Is the stage set? Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 10, 169–179.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schumm, J., Vaughn, S., Haager, D., McDowell, J., Rothlein, L., & Saumell, L. (1995). General education teacher planning: What can students with learning disabilities expect? Exceptional Children, 61(4), 335–352.

  • Shayshon, B., & Tesler, B. (2008). Does it make a difference? Studying the impact of teachers’ program aimed at meeting mathematically talented students’ needs. In R. Leikin (Ed.), Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Creativity in Mathematics and the Education of Gifted Students (pp. 217–221). Israel: Haifa.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skaalvik, E. M., & Bong, M. (2003). Self-concept and self-efficacy revisited. In H. W. Marsh, R. G. Craven, & D. M. McInerney (Eds.), International advances in self research (pp. 67–90). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing Inc.

  • Sternberg, R. (1996). Neither elitism nor egalitarianism: Gifted education as a third force in American Education. Roeper Review, 18(4), 261–263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stipek, D. J., Givvin, K. B., Salmon, J. M., & MacGyvers, V. L. (2001). Teachers’ beliefs and practices related to mathematics instruction. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17(2), 213–226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stradling, B., & Saunders, L. (1993). Differentiation in practice: Responding to the needs of all pupils. Educational Research, 35(2), 127–137.

  • Stronge, J. H. (2007). Qualities of effective teachers. Alexandria, USA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD).

    Google Scholar 

  • Sundström, A. (2006). Beliefs about perceived competence: A literature review. Educational Measurement, 55. Retrieved 19.08.11 from http://www.edusci.umu.se/forskning/publikationer/publikationer-bvm--engelsk-/

  • Tall, D., & Vinner, S. (1981). Concept image and concept definition in mathematics with particular reference to limits and continuity. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 12(2), 151–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tirri, K. A., Tallent-Runnels, M. K., Adams, A. M., Yuen, M. & Lau, P. S. Y. (2002). Cross-cultural predictors of teachers’ attitudes toward gifted education: Finland, Hong Kong, and USA. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.

  • Tomlinson, C. (1995). Deciding to differentiate instruction in middle school: One school’s journey. Gifted Child Quarterly, 39(2), 77–87.

  • Tomlinson, C. (2003). Fulfilling the promise of the differentiated classroom: Strategies and tools for responsive teaching. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tomlinson, C., Brighton, C., Hertberg, H., Callahan, C., Moon, T., Brimijoin, K., Conover, L., & Reynolds, T. (2003). Differentiating instruction in response to student readiness, interest, and learning profile in academically diverse classrooms: A review of literature. Journal for the Education of the Gifted 27(2-3). pp. 119–45.

  • Triandis, H. C. (1995). Individualism and collectivism. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Triandis, H. C., & Gelfand, M. J. (1998). Converging measurement of horizontal and vertical individualism and collectivism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(1), 118–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Triandis, H. C., McCusker, C., & Hui, C. H. (1990). Multimethod probes of individualism and collectivism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59(5), 1006–1020.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vialle, W., & Rogers, K. B. (2012). Gifted, talented, or educationally disadvantaged? The case for including “giftedness” in teacher education programs. In C. Forlin (Ed.), Future directions for inclusive teacher education: An international perspective (pp. 112-120). London: Routledge.

  • Watson, A. (1996). Teachers’ notions of mathematical ability in their pupils. Mathematics Education Review, 8, 27–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Westberg, K., Archambault, F., Dobyns, S., & Salvin, T. (1993). An observational study of instructional and curricular practices used with gifted and talented students in regular classrooms (Research Monograph 93104). Storrs: University of Connecticut, National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented.

  • Whang, W. H. (2001). Speculating on the high achievement of Korean students. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM). Retrieved 29.03.12 from http://www.nctm.org/resources/content.aspx?id=1592

  • Whitmore, J. R. (1988). Gifted children at risk for learning disabilities. Teaching Exceptional Children, 20(4), 10–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winebrenner, S. (2001). Teaching gifted kids in the regular classroom: Strategies and techniques every teacher can use to meet the academic needs of the gifted and talented. Minneapolis, MN.: Free Spirit Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winstanley, C. (2006). Inequity in equity: Tackling the excellence-equality conundrum. In C. M. M. Smith (Ed.), Making inclusion work for more gifted and able learners (pp. 22–40). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wolters, C. A., & Daugherty, S. G. (2007). Goals structures and teachers’ sense of efficacy: Their relation and association to teaching experience and academic level. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(1), 181–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, D., Li, S., & Tang, R. (2004). The “two basics”: Mathematics teaching and learning in Mainland China. In L. Fan, N. Y. Wong, J. Cai, & S. Li (Eds.), How Chinese learn mathematics: Perspectives from insiders. New Jersey: World Scientific.

  • Zorman, R., Rachmel, S., & Shaked, A. (2004). Principals for developing special curriculum for gifted students. Jerusalem: Ministry of education, division for outstanding and gifted students. Hebrew.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. The David Yellin College of Education, 7 Hama’agal Street, P.O.B. 3578, 91035, Jerusalem, Israel

    Bruria Shayshon, Hagar Gal & Bertha Tesler

  2. Jeonju National University of Education, Seoul, South Korea

    Eun-Sung Ko

Authors
  1. Bruria Shayshon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hagar Gal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Bertha Tesler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Eun-Sung Ko
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hagar Gal.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

ESM 1

(DOC 118 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Shayshon, B., Gal, H., Tesler, B. et al. Teaching mathematically talented students: a cross-cultural study about their teachers’ views. Educ Stud Math 87, 409–438 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-014-9568-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-014-9568-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation