User Name:

Password:
Welcome Guest
Journals Home > Journal Of Advanced Academics > Volume 19 |  Issue 2 > Article Abstract
 

Abstract

Back to TOC
Reference
X

  • Ablard, K. E. (1997). Self-perceptions and needs as a function of type of academic ability and gender. Roeper Review 20, 110–115.
  • Blyth, D. A., Saito, R., & Berkas, T. (1997). A quantitative study of the impact of service-learning programs. In A. S. Waterman (Ed.), Service learning: Applications from the research (pp. 39–56). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  • Chan, L. K. S. (1988). The perceived competence of intellectually talented students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 32, 310–314.
  • Chapin, J. R. (1998). Is service learning a good idea? Data from the national longitudinal study of 1988. The Social Studies, 89, 205–211.
  • Commuter Affairs and Community Service, University of Maryland. (1999). Faculty handbook for service-learning. College Park, MD: Author.
  • Conrad, D., & Hedin, D. (1982). The impact of experiential education on adolescent development. Child and Youth Services 4(3/4), 57–76.
  • Conrad, D., & Hedin, D. (1989). High school community service: A review of research and programs. Madison, WI: National Center on Effective Secondary Schools, University of Wisconsin-Madison.
  • Conrad, D., & Hedin, D. (1991). School-based community service: What we know from research and theory. Phi Delta Kappan, 72, 743–749.
  • Corporation for National and Community Service. (2002). Using the PARE model in service-learning. Retrieved February 15, 2008, from http://nationalserviceresources.org/epicenter/practices/index.php?ep_action=view&ep_id=826.
  • Davis, G. A., & Rimm, S. B. (1998). Education of the gifted and talented (4th ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
  • Eyler, J., & Giles, D. (1999). Where’s the learning in service learning? San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
  • Furco, A. (1996). Service learning: A balanced approach to experiential education. In B. Taylor (Ed.), Expanding boundaries: Service and learning (pp. 2–6). Washington, DC: Corporation for National Service.
  • Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). Discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine.
  • Goldsmith, S. (1996). RE: Right and responsibilities. Washington, DC: Alliance for Rights and Responsibilities.
  • Gross, M. U. M. (1993). Exceptionally gifted children. New York: Routledge.
  • Hamilton, S. F., & Fenzel, L. M. (1988). The impact of volunteer experience on adolescent social development: Evidence of program effects. Journal of Adolescent Research, 3, 65–80.
  • Hinck, S. S., & Brandell, M. E. (1999). Service learning: Facilitating academic learning and character development. NASSP Bulletin, 83(609), 16–24.
  • Hursh, B., & Borzak, L. (1979). Toward cognitive development through field studies. Journal of Higher Education, 50, 63–78.
  • Janos, P. M., Fung, H. C., & Robinson, N. M. (1985). Self-concepts, self-esteem, and peer relations among gifted children who feel “different.” Gifted Child Quarterly, 29, 79–82.
  • Katz, E. (1995). Self-concept and the gifted student. Boulder, CO: Open Space Communications.
  • Kohlberg, L. (1969). Stage and sequence: The cognitive developmental approach to socialization. In D. A. Goslin (Ed.), Handbook of socialization theory and research (pp. 347–480). Chicago: Rand McNally.
  • Kunin, M. M. (1997). Service learning and improved academic achievement: The national scene. In J. Schine (Ed.), Service learning: Ninety-sixth yearbook of the national society of the study of education (pp. 149–160). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
  • Lee, S.-Y., & Olszewski-Kubilius, P. M. (2006). The emotional intelligence, moral judgment, and leadership of academically gifted adolescents. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 30, 29–67.
  • Lewis, B. (1996). Serving others hooks gifted students on learning. Educational Leadership, 53, 70–74.
  • Matthews, M. S. (2004). Leadership education for gifted and talented youth: A review of the literature. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 28, 77–113.
  • Mintz, S., & Liu, G. (1994). Service learning: An overview. Washington, DC: Corporation for National and Community Service.
  • Newmann, F. M., & Rutter, R. A. (1983). The effects of high school community service programs on students’ social development: Final report. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin, Wisconsin Center for Educational Research.
  • Olszewski-Kubilius, P. M., Kulieke, M. J., & Krasney, N. (1988). Personality dimensions of gifted adolescents: A review of the empirical literature. Gifted Child Quarterly, 32, 347–352.
  • Osborne, R. E., Hammerich, S., & Hensley, C. (1998). Student effects of service learning: Tracking change across a semester. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, 5, 5–13.
  • Passow, A. H. (1988). Educating gifted persons who are caring and concerned. Roeper Review, 11, 13–15.
  • Passow, A. H. (1989). Educating gifted persons who are caring and concerned. Gifted Education International, 6, 5–7.
  • Renzulli, J. S. (1976). The enrichment triad model: A guide for developing defensible programs for the gifted and talented. Gifted Child Quarterly, 20, 303–326.
  • Renzulli, J. S. (1977). The enrichment triad model: A guide for developing defensible programs for the gifted. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
  • Renzulli, J. S., & Reis, S. M. (1997). The schoolwide enrichment model: A how to guide for educational excellence (2nd ed.). Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
  • Silverman, L. K. (1994). The moral sensitivity of gifted children and the evolution of society. Roeper Review, 17, 110–116.
  • Sorenson, J., & Francis, M. (1988). The gifted program handbook: Planning, implementing, and evaluating gifted programs. Palo Alto, CA: Dale Seymour Publications.
  • Strauss, A. L. (1987). Qualitative analysis for social scientists. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
  • Strauss, A. L., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
  • Tan-Willman, C., & Gutteridge, D. (1981). Creative thinking and moral reasoning of academically gifted secondary school adolescents. Gifted Child Quarterly, 25, 149–154.
  • Terry, A. W. (2000). An early glimpse: Service learning from an adolescent perspective. Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 11, 115–135.
  • Terry, A. W., & Bohnenberger, J. E. (2003). Service learning: Fostering a cycle of caring in our gifted youth. Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 15, 23–32.
  • Trebilcox, P. S. (1997). S.O.S.: A gifted class responds. Gifted Child Today, 20(5), 42–45.
  • Willard, D. E. (1984). A “social” social studies model for gifted students. Teaching Exceptional Children, 17, 18–22.
  • VanTassel-Baska, J. (1993). Theory and research on curriculum development for the gifted. In K. A. Heller, F. J. Mönks, & H. Passow (Eds.), International handbook of research and development of giftedness and talent (pp. 365–386). Oxford, England: Pergamon Press.
  • Waterman, A. S. (1997). An overview of service learning and the role of research and evaluation in service learning programs. In A. S. Waterman (Ed.), Service learning: Applications from the research (pp. 1–11). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  • Zeldin, S., & Tarlov, S. (1997). Service learning as a vehicle for youth development. In J. Schine (Ed.), Service learning: Ninety-sixth year-book of the national society for the study of education (pp. 173–185). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Fields marked with an asterisk * are mandatory.
 

Your Name:*
 

Your Email:*
 

Friend's Name:*
 

Friend's Email:*
 

Message:
 

 
Send CC to self
 

 
 

Bookmark
X
  • Volume 19
  •  Issue 2
  • Publication Date: Winter 2008



The Civic Leadership Institute: A Service-Learning Program for Academically Gifted Youth

Seon-Young Lee, Paula Olszewski-Kubilius, Rob Donahue, and Katrina Weimholt

This study describes the Civic Leadership Institute (CLI), a service-learning program for gifted adolescents, and examines students’ satisfaction and perceptions of their service-learning experiences with the program. Survey responses and narrative comments from 230 gifted high school students who participated in CLI revealed that academic coursework combined with various hands-on experiences enhanced the students’ awareness of civic issues, increased their motivation to engage in social issues in communities, and caused them to gain a new understanding and respect for diversity. Students suggested more frequent field experiences as well as service projects more tightly linked with academic content.


ShoppingCart Summary

Shopping
Your cart is empty.