User Name:

Password:
Welcome Guest
Journals Home > The Journal Of Secondary Gifted Education > Volume 16 |  Issue 1 > Article Abstract
 

Abstract

Back to TOC
Reference
X

  • Ames, C. (1992). Achievement goals and the classroom motivational climate. In D. H. Schunk & J. L. Meece (Eds.), Student perceptions in the classroom (pp., 327–348). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
  • Arbuckle, J. L. (2003). AMOS 5.0 [Computer software]. Chicago: SmallWaters.
  • Ausubel, D., Novak, J., & Hanesian, H. (1978). Educational psychology: A cognitive view (2nd ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
  • Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.
  • Baird, J., & Penna, C. (1996). Challenge in learning and teaching science. Research in Science Education, 26, 257–269.
  • Bloom, B. S. (Ed.). (1985). Developing talent in young people. New York: Ballantine Books.
  • Bransford, J. D., Vye, N. Y., Kinzer, C., & Risko, V. J. (1990). Teaching thinking and content knowledge toward an integrated approach. In B. Jones (Ed.), Teaching thinking (pp. 381–413). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
  • Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
  • Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Literacy and intrinsic motivation. Daedalus, 119, 115–140.
  • Csikszentmihalyi, M., Rathunde, K., & Whalen, S. (1993). Talented teenagers: The roots of success and failure. New York: Cambridge University Press.
  • Deci, E. L. (1995). Why we do what we do: The dynamics of personal autonomy. New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons.
  • Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York: Plenum.
  • Deci, E. L. & Ryan, R. (1992). The initiation and regulation of intrinsically motivated learning and achievement. In A. Boggiano & T. Pittman (Eds.), Achievement and motivation (pp. 9–36). New York: Cambridge University Press.
  • Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education. New York: The Free Press. Dewey, J. (1933). How we think (Rev. ed.). New York: Heath.
  • Eccles, J. S., Midgley, C. (1989). Stage-environment fit: Developmentally appropriate classrooms for young adolescents. In C. Ames & R. Ames (Eds.), Research on motivation in education: Vol. 3: Goals and cognitions (pp. 13–44). New York: Academic.
  • Eisner, E. W. (2001). What does it mean to say a school is doing well? Phi Delta Kappan, 82, 367–372.
  • Feldhusen, J. F., & Kroll, M. D. (1991). Boredom or challenge for the academically talented in school. Gifted Education International, 7, 80–81.
  • Gable, R. K., & Wolf, M. B. (1993). Instrument development in the affective domain. Boston: Kluwer.
  • Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. New York: BasicBooks.
  • Gardner, H. (1991). The unschooled mind: How children think and how schools should teach. New York: BasicBooks.
  • Gentry, M. L., & Gable, R. K., (2001). My Class Activities: Instrument and technical manual. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
  • Gentry, M., & Springer, P. (2002). Secondary student perceptions of their class activities regarding meaningfulness, challenge, choice, and appeal: An initial instrument validation study. Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 13, 192–204.
  • Glasser, W. (1996). Then and now: The theory of choice. Learning, 25, 20–22.
  • Goodlad, J. I. (1984). A place called school. New York: McGraw-Hill.
  • Haladyna, T., & Thomas, G. (1979). The attitudes of elementary school children toward school and subject matters. Journal of Experimental Education, 48, 18–23.
  • Little, T. D., Cunningham, W. A., Shahar, G., & Widaman, K. F. (2002). To parcel or not to parcel: Exploring the question, weighing the merits. Structural Equation Modeling, 9, 151–173.
  • Piaget, J. (1970). Piaget’s theory. In P. H. Mussen (Ed.), Carmichael’s manual of child psychology: Vol. 1 (3rd ed., pp. 703–732). New York: Wiley.
  • Pintrich, P., & Schrauben, B. (1992). Students’ motivational beliefs and their cognitive engagement in classroom academic tasks. In D. H. Schunk & J. L. Meece (Eds.), Student perceptions in the classroom (pp. 149–183). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
  • Popham, W. J. (2001). The truth about testing: An educator’s call to action. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
  • Renzulli, J. S. (1978). What makes giftedness? Reexamining a definition. Phi Delta Kappan, 60, 180–184.
  • Renzulli, J. S. (1994). Schools for talent development: A comprehensive plan for total school improvement. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
  • Renzulli J. S. Leppien, J., & Hays, T. (2000). The multiple menu model: A practical guide for developing differentiated curriculum. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
  • Renzulli, J. S., & Reis, S. M. (1997). The schoolwide enrichment model: A comprehensive plan for educational excellence (2nd ed.). Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
  • Schiefele, U. (1991). Interests, learning and motivation. Educational Psychologist, 26, 299–323.
  • Sternberg, R. J. (1997). Successful intelligence. New York: Plume.
  • Tobias, S. (1994). Interest, prior knowledge and learning. Review of Educational Research, 64(1), 37–54.
  • Tomlinson, C. A. (1995). How to differentiate instruction in mixed ability classrooms. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
  • Tomlinson, C. A. (1999). The differentiated classroom: Responding to the needs of all learnersTomlinson, C. A., & Callahan, C. M. (1992). Contributions of gifted education to general education in a time of change.
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 16
  •  Issue 1
  • Publication Date: Fall 2004



Secondary Student Perceptions of Classroom Quality: Instrumentation and Differences Between Advanced/Honors and Nonhonors Classes

Marcia Gentry and Steven V. Owen

This article describes the initial development and psychometric evaluation of an instrument for use with secondary students to measure various perceptions about class activities. The instrument—Student Perceptions of Classroom Quality (SPOCQ)—focuses on meaningfulness, challenge, choice, self-efficacy, and appeal, constructs central to learning and deeply rooted in gifted education. The article reports content and construct validity evidence, reliability estimates, and demographic group comparisons from a diverse national sample of students in grades 7–12 (N = 7,411). The article also details differences between advanced and general education students’ perceptions of their classroom environments. SPOCQ can be useful to those interested in classroom research, as well as those aiming to improve teaching and learning by considering students’ perceptions of class activities.


ShoppingCart Summary

Shopping
Your cart is empty.