User Name:

Password:
Welcome Guest
Journals Home > The Journal Of Secondary Gifted Education > Volume 17 |  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.
  • Bain, S. K., & Bell, S. M. (2004). Social self-concept, social attributions, and peer relationships in fourth, fifth, and sixth graders who are gifted compared to high achievers. Gifted Child Quarterly, 48, 167–178.
  • Brody, L. E., & Benbow, C. P. (1986). Social and emotional adjustment of adolescents extremely talented in verbal or mathematical reasoning. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 15, 1–18.
  • Brookby, S. A. (2004). Academic self-efficacy and social self-concept of mathematically gifted high school students in a summer residential program (Doctoral dissertation, University of Missouri, Kansas City, 2004). Dissertation Abstracts International, 65, 1707.
  • Byrne, B. M., & Shavelson, R. J. (1996). On the structure of social self-concept for pre-, early, and late adolescents: A test of the Shavelson, Hubner, and Stanton (1976) model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 599–613.
  • Colangelo, N., Assouline, S. G., & Gross, M. U. M. (2004). A nation deceived: How schools hold back America’s brightest students (Vol. 1). Iowa City, IA: The Connie Belin & Jacqueline N. Blank International Center for Gifted Education and Talent Development.
  • Colangelo, N., Kelly, K. R., & Schrepfer, R. M. (1987). A comparison of gifted, general, and special learning needs students on academic and social self-concept. Journal of Counseling and Development, 66, 73–77.
  • Coleman, L. J., & Cross, T. L. (1988). Is being gifted a social handicap? Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 11, 41–56.
  • Cornell, D. G. (1990). High ability students who are unpopular with their peers. Gifted Child Quarterly, 34, 155–160.
  • Dixon, F. A. (1998). Social and academic self-concepts of gifted adolescents. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 22, 80–94.
  • Enerson, D. L. (1993). Summer residential programs: Academics and beyond. Gifted Child Quarterly, 37, 169–176.
  • Erikson, E. H. (1963). Childhood and society. New York: Norton.
  • Gallagher, J. (2004). No Child Left Behind and gifted education. Roeper Review, 26, 121–123.
  • Gilman, R., Laughlin, J. E., & Huebner, E. S. (1999). Validation of the Self-Description Questionnaire-II with an American sample. School Psychology International, 20, 300–307.
  • Hoge, R. D., & Renzulli, J. S. (1993). Exploring the link between giftedness and self-concept. Review of Educational Research, 63, 449–465.
  • Humes, C. W., II, & Campbell, R. D. (1980). Gifted students: A 15-year longitudinal study. Gifted Child Quarterly, 24, 129–131.
  • Kelly, K. R., & Colangelo, N. (1984). Academic and social self-concepts of gifted, general, and special students. Exceptional Children, 50, 551–554.
  • Kelly, K. R., & Jordan, L. K. (1990). Effects of academic achievement and gender on academic and social self-concept: A replication study. Journal of Counseling and Development, 69, 173–177.
  • Kolloff, P. B., & Moore, A. D. (1989). Effects of summer programs on the self-concepts of gifted children. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 12, 268–276.
  • Lenz, K., & Burruss, J. D. (1994). Meeting affective needs through summer academic experiences. Roeper Review, 17, 51.
  • Leroux, J. A. (1988). Voices from the classroom: Academic and social self-concepts of gifted adolescents. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 11, 3–18.
  • Manor-Bullock, R. (1994). Gifted adolescents: Social comparisons and changes in self-concept on entering a rigorous academic program in a residential environment (Doctoral dissertation, Ball State University, 1994). Dissertation Abstracts International, 55, 3638.
  • Marsh, H. W. (1986). Verbal and math self-concepts: An internal/external frame of reference model. American Educational Research Journal, 23, 129–149.
  • Marsh, H. W. (1990). Self-Description Questionnaire (SDQ) II: Manual. New South Wales, Australia: University of Western Sydney.
  • 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.
  • Marsh, H. W., Kong, C., & Hau, K. (2000). Longitudinal multilevel models of the big-fish-little-pond effect on academic self-concept: Counterbalancing contrast and reflected-glory effects in Hong Kong schools. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 337–349.
  • Marsh, H. W., & O’Neill, R. (1984). Self-Description Questionnaire III: The construct validity of multidimensional self-concept ratings by late-adolescents. Journal of Educational Measurement, 21, 153–174.
  • Marsh, H. W., & Parker, J. W. (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.
  • Marsh, H. W., & Shavelson, R. (1985). Self-concept: Its multifaceted, hierarchical structure. Educational Psychologist, 20, 107–123.
  • Mayseless, O. (1993). Gifted adolescents and intimacy in close same-sex friendships. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 22, 135–146.
  • Meece, J. L. (2002). Child and adolescent development for educators (2nd ed.). Boston: McGraw-Hill.
  • Moon, S. M., Feldhusen, J. F., & Dillon, D. R. (1994). Long-term effects of an enrichment program based on the Purdue Three-Stage Model. Gifted Child Quarterly, 38, 38–48.
  • Norman, A. D., Ramsay, S. G., Roberts, J. L., & Martray, C. R. (2000). Effect of social setting, self-concept, and relative age on the social status of moderately and highly gifted students. Roeper Review, 23, 34–39.
  • Olszewski, P., Kulieke, M. J., & Willis, G. B. (1987). Changes in the self-perceptions of gifted students who participate in rigorous academic programs. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 10, 287–303.
  • Olszewski-Kubilius, P. (2003). Special summer and Saturday programs for gifted students. In N. Colangelo & G. A. Davis (Eds.), Handbook of gifted education (3rd ed., pp. 219–228). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
  • Parker, J. P. (1998). The Torrance creative scholars program. Roeper Review, 21, 32–35.
  • Paul, K. M., & Plucker, J. A. (2004). Two steps forward, one step back: Effect size reporting in gifted education research from 1995–2000. Roeper Review, 26, 68–72.
  • Peterson, J. S., & Rischar, H. (2000). Gifted and gay: A study of the adolescent experience. Gifted Child Quarterly, 44, 231–244.
  • Plucker, J. A. (1997). Debunking the myth of the “highly significant” result: Effect sizes in gifted education research. Roeper Review, 20, 122–126.
  • Plucker, J. A., Taylor, J. W., V, Callahan, C. M., & Tomchin, E. M. (1997). Mirror, mirror, on the wall: Reliability and validity evidence for the Self-Description Questionnaire II with gifted students. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 57, 704–713.
  • Plucker, J. A., & Stocking, V. B. (2001). Looking outside and inside: Self-concept development of gifted adolescents. Exceptional Children, 67, 535–548.
  • Purcell, J. H. (1993). The effects of the elimination of gifted and talented programs on participating students and their parents. Gifted Child Quarterly, 37, 177–187.
  • Pyryt, M. C., & Mendaglio, S. (1994). The multidimensional self-concept: A comparison of gifted and average-ability adolescents. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 17, 299–305.
  • Rinn, A. N. (2005). Trends among honors college students: An analysis by year in school. Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 16, 157–167.
  • Ross, A., & Parker, M. (1980). Academic and social self-concepts of the academically gifted. Exceptional Children, 47(1), 6–10.
  • Shavelson, R. J., Hubner, J. J., & Stanton, G. C. (1976). Validation of construct interpretations. Review of Educational Research, 46, 407–441.
  • Spielhagen, F. R., & Cooper, B. S. (2005, April 13). The unkindest cut. Education Week, pp. 47–48.
  • Stocking, V. B., Porter, L. C., Goldstein, D., & Oppler, S. H. (1993, April). The self-concept of talented adolescents in an intensive summer program: Implications for programming. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Atlanta, GA.
  • Thomas, T. A. (1989). Acceleration for the academically talented: A follow-up of the academic talent search class of 1984. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED307303).
  • Tymms, P. (2001). A test of the big fish in a little pond hypothesis: An investigation into the feelings of seven-year-old pupils in school. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 12, 161–181.
  • Vaughn, V. L., Feldhusen, J. F., & Asher, J. W. (1991). Meta-analyses and review of research on pull-out programs in gifted education. Gifted Child Quarterly, 35, 92–98.
  • Worrell, F. C., Roth, D. A., & Gabelko, N. H. (1998). Age and gender differences in the self-concepts of academically talented students. Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 9, 157–162.
  • Wright, P. B., & Leroux, J. A. (1997). The self-concept of gifted adolescents in a congregated program. Gifted Child Quarterly, 41, 83–94.
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 17
  •  Issue 2
  • Publication Date: Winter 2006



Effects of a Summer Program on the Social Self-Concepts of Gifted Adolescents

Anne N. Rinn

This study investigates the change in social self-concept among adolescents participating in a summer program for the gifted. Participants include 140 gifted students who had completed the 7th through 10th grade during the previous academic year. Social self-concept was measured at the beginning and end of the summer camp using the same-sex peer relations and the opposite-sex peer relations subscales of the Self-Description Questionnaire II (Marsh, 1990). Results indicate both males and females experienced an increase in their perceived same-sex peer relations and their perceived opposite-sex peer relations over the course of the summer program. Conclusions and implications for education policy are discussed.


ShoppingCart Summary

Shopping
Your cart is empty.