Multidisciplinary perspectives and field strengthening questions for gifted education research

References

• Abdulkadiroglu, A., Angrist, J., & Pathak, P. (2014). The elite illusion: Achievement effects at Boston and New York exam schools. Econometrica, 82(1), 137–196.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Akerlof, G. A. (2020). Sins of omission and the practice of economics. Journal of Economic Literature, 58(2), 405–418.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ambrose, D., Van Tassel-Baska, J., Coleman, L. J., & Cross, T. L. (2010). Unified, insular, firmly policed, or fractured, porous, contested, gifted education? Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 33(4), 453–478.
   Google Scholar
• America’s Best Colleges. (2015).Retrieved August 4, 2022, from Available online: http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges
   Google Scholar
• Angus, S. D., Atalay, K., Newton, J., & Ubilava, D. (2020). Geographic diversity in economic publishing. SSRN. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3697906
   Google Scholar
• Assouline, S. G., Colangelo, N., VanTassel-Baska, J., & Lupkowski-Shoplik, A. (2015). A nation empowered: Evidence trumps excuses holding back America’s brightest students. Iowa City, IA: Belin Blank Center for Gifted Education and Talent Development. University of Iowa.
   Google Scholar
• Bailey, D. H., Duncan, G. J., Cunha, F., Foorman, B. R., & Yeager, D. S. (2020). Persistence and fade out of educational intervention effects: Mechanisms and potential solutions. Psychological Science in the Public Interest. Retrieved August 4, 2022, from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/339956602_Persistence_and_Fadeout_of_Educational_Intervention_Effects_Mechanisms_and_Potential_Solutions
   Google Scholar
• Baron, K. (2019). Serving the math whiz kids. Education Next, 19: 4 https://www.educationnext.org/serving-math-whiz-kids-private-enrichment-programs-step-up-meet-need/
   Google Scholar
• Barshay, J. (2021). Gifted programs provide little to no academic boost, new study says. The Hechinger Report. Retrieved August 4, 2022, from https://hechingerreport.org/proof-points-gifted-programs-provide-little-to-no-academic-boost-new-study-says/
   Google Scholar
• Bernstein, B. O., Lubinski, D., & Benbow, C. P. (2020). Academic acceleration in gifted youth and fruitless concerns regarding psychological well-being: A 35-year longitudinal study. Journal of Educational Psychology. doi:10.1037/edu0000500
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bhattacharya, J., & Packalen, M. (2020). Stagnation and scientific incentives. NBER Working Paper 26752. Retrieved August 4, 2022, from http://www.nber.org/papers/w26752
   Google Scholar
• Blanchard, O., & Rodrik, D. (Eds.). (2021). Combating inequality. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Borland, J. H. (1996). Gifted education and the threat of irrelevance. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 19(2), 129–147.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brown, M. I., Wai, J., & Chabris, C. F. (2021). Can you ever be too smart for your own good? Comparing linear and nonlinear effects of cognitive ability on life outcomes. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 16(6), 1337–1359.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bryk, A. S. ((2015). 2014). AERA distinguished lecture: Accelerating how we learn to improve. Educational Researcher, 44(9), 467–477.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bui, S. A., Craig, S., & Imberman, S. A. (2012). Is gifted education a bright idea? Assessing the impact of gifted and talented programs on students. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 6(3), 30–62.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Callahan, C. M. (1996). A critical self-study of gifted education: Healthy practice, necessary evil, or sedition? Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 19(2), 148–163.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Card, D., & Giuliano, L. (2014). Does gifted education work? For which students? NBER Working Paper No. 20453. Retrieved August 4, 2022, from https://www.nber.org/papers/w20453
   Google Scholar
• Carroll, J. B. (1993). Human cognitive abilities: A survey of factor-analytic studies. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Casadevall, A., Fang, F. C., & Morrison, R. P. (2014). Specialized science. Infection and Immunity, 82, 1355–1360.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ceci, S. J., & Papierno, P. B. (2005). The rhetoric and reality of gap closing: When the “have-nots” gain but the “haves” gain even more. American Psychologist, 60(2), 149–160.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coleman, L. J., & Coleman, L. J. (1996). Notes from the editor’s desk: Critical appraisals of gifted education. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 19, 127–128.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Conaway, C. (2020). Maximizing research use in the world we actually live in: Relationships, organizations, and interpretation. Education Finance and Policy, 15(1), 1–10.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dale, S., & Krueger, A. B. (2011). Estimating the return to college selectivity over the career using administrative earnings data. NBER Working Paper No. 17159. Retrieved August 4, 2022, from https://www.nber.org/papers/w17159
   Google Scholar
• Damian, R. I., Su, R., Shanahan, M., Trautwein, U., & Roberts, B. W. (2014). Can personality traits and intelligence compensate for background disadvantage? Predicting status attainment in adulthood. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 109(3), 473–489.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Los Reyes, A. (2020). The early career researcher’s toolbox: Insights into mentors, peer review, and landing a faculty job. College Park, MD: The Center for Reinforcing Early Academic Training and Enhancement (CREATE).
   Google Scholar
• Dobbie, W., & Fryer, R. G., Jr. (2014). The impact of attending a school with high-achieving peers: Evidence from the New York City Exam Schools. American Economic Journal. Applied Economics, 6(3), 58–75.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duarte, J. L., Crawford, J. T., Stern, C., Haidt, J., Jussim, L., & Tetlock, P. E. (2015). Political diversity will improve social psychological science. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 38, e130.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dunnette, M. D. (1966). Fads, fashions, and folderol in psychology. American Psychologist, 21(4), 343–352.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Education Next (2020). Results from the 2020 Education Next poll. Retrieved August 4, 2022, from https://www.educationnext.org/2020-ednext-poll-interactive/
   Google Scholar
• Eliot, C. W. (1908). University administration. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
   Google Scholar
• Ericsson, K. A. (2014). Why expert performance is special and cannot be extrapolated from studies of performance in the general population: A response to criticisms. Intelligence, 45, 81–103.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frey, M. C., & Detterman, D. K. (2004). Scholastic assessment or g? The relationship between the Scholastic Assessment Test and general cognitive ability. Psychological Science, 15, 373–378.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gallagher, J. J. (2000). Unthinkable thoughts: Education of gifted students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 44, 5–12.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gelman, A. (2009). Describing descriptive studies using descriptive language, or the practical virtues of statistical humility. Retrieved August 4, 2022, from Statistical modeling, causal inference, and social science: https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2009/03/02/describing_desc/
   Google Scholar
• Godechot, O., & Louvet, A. (2010). Academic inbreeding: An evaluation. Laviedesidees.fr. Retrieved August 4, 2022, from https://booksandideas.net/Academic-Inbreeding-An-Evaluation.html
   Google Scholar
• Gorelova, O., & Yudkevich, M. (2015). Academic inbreeding and mobility in higher education. M. Yudkevich, P. G. Altbach, & L. E. Rumbley Eds., (pp. 17–44). London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Hair, N. L., Hanson, J. L., Wolfe, B. L., & Pollak, S. D. (2015). Association of child poverty, brain development, and academic achievement. JAMA Pediatrics, 169(9), 822–829.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hambrick, D. Z., Macnamara, B. N., Campitelli, G., Ullen, F., & Mosing, M. A. (2016). Beyond born versus made: A new look at expertise. Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 64, 1–55.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hamming, R. W. (2020). The art of doing science and engineering: Learning to learn. San Francisco, CA: Stripe Press.
   Google Scholar
• Henrich, J., Heine, S. J., & Norenzayan, A. (2010). The weirdest people in the world? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33, 61–83.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• IJzerman, H., Dutra, N., Silan, M., Adetula, A., Basnight Brown, D. M., & Forscher, P. (2021). Psychological science needs the entire globe, Part 1. Association for Psychological Science Observer. Retrieved August 4, 2022, from https://www.psychologicalscience.org/observer/global-psych-science
   Google Scholar
• Ito, J. (2014). Antidisciplinary. Retrieved August 4, 2022, from https://joi.ito.com/weblog/2014/10/02/antidisciplinar.html
   Google Scholar
• Ito, J. (2017). The antidisciplinary approach. Research-Technology Management, 60(6), 22–28.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kelley, T. L. (1927). Interpretation of educational measurements. Chicago, IL: World Book Company.
   Google Scholar
• Kim, M. (2016). A meta-analysis of the effects of enrichment programs on gifted students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 60(2), 102–116.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koenig, K. A., Frey, M. C., & Detterman, D. K. (2008). ACT and general cognitive ability. Intelligence, 36(2), 153–160.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kroesbergen, E. H., van Hooijdonk, M., Van Viersen, S., Middel-Lalleman, M. M. N., & Reijnders, J. J. W. (2015). The psychological well being of early identified gifted children. Gifted Child Quarterly, 60(1), 16–30.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kulik, J. A., & Kulik, C. C. (1992). Meta-analytic findings on grouping programs. Gifted Child Quarterly, 36, 73077.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lewis, N. A., Jr., & Wai, J. (2021). Communicating what we know, and what isn’t so: Science communication in psychology. Perspectives on Psychological Science. doi:10.1177/1745691620964062
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lohman, D. F. (1993). Teaching and testing to develop fluid abilities. Educational Researcher, 22(7), 12–23.
   Google Scholar
• Lohman, D. F. (2005). Identifying academically talented minority students. The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented. Retrieved August 4, 2022, from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED505376.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Lortie-Forgues, H., & Inglis, M. (2019). Rigorous large-scale educational RCTs are often uninformative: Should we be concerned? Educational Researcher, 48(3), 158–166.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lubinski, D. (2004). Introduction to the special section on cognitive abilities: 100 years after Spearman’s (1904) “General intelligence,’ objectively determined and measured. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86(1), 96–111.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lubinski, D., & Benbow, C. P. (2020). Intellectual precocity: What have we learned since Terman? Gifted Child Quarterly. 10.1177/0016986220925447
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lubinski, D., Benbow, C. P., & Kell, H. J. (2014). Life paths and accomplishments of mathematically precocious males and females four decades later. Psychological Science, 25(12), 2217–2232.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lyall, C. (2019). Being an interdisciplinary academic: How institutions shape university careers. London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Makel, M. C., Kell, H. J., Lubinski, D., Putallaz, M., & Benbow, C. P. (2016). When lightning strikes twice: Profoundly gifted, profoundly accomplished. Psychological Science, 27(7), 1004–1018.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Makel, M. C., & Wai, J. (2016). Does economic research in education work? For which studies? Journal of Advanced Academics, 27(2), 73–80.
   Google Scholar
• Matthews, M. S., Peters, S., & Housand, A. (2012). Regression discontinuity design in gifted and talented education research. Gifted Child Quarterly, 56(2), 105–112.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McClarty, K. L. (2014). Life in the fast lane: Effects of early grade acceleration on high school and college outcomes. Gifted Child Quarterly, 59(1), 3–13.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Might, M. (2010). The illustrated guide to the Ph.D. Retrieved August 4, 2022, from https://matt.might.net/articles/phd-school-in-pictures/
   Google Scholar
• Moon, S. M. (2009). Myth 15: High-ability students don’t face problems and challenges. Gifted Child Quarterly, 53(4), 274–276.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Packer, G. (2020). The enemies of writing. The Atlantic. Retrieved August 4, 2022, from https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/01/packer-hitchens/605365/
   Google Scholar
• Park, G., Lubinski, D., & Benbow, C. P. (2013). When less is more: Effects of grade skipping on adult STEM productivity among mathematically precocious adolescents. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(1), 176–198.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peters, S. J., & Matthews, M. S. Eds. 2016, Special issue: Gifted education research in the field of economics. Journal of advanced academics, Vol. 27: 63–161. https://journals.sagepub.com/toc/joa/27/2
   Google Scholar
• Place NYC G&T Working Group (2021). Expanding gifted & talented: Immediate action towards an idea future. Place NYC report. Retrieved August 4, 2022, from https://placenyc.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/PLACE-NYC-Expanding-GT-11-2021_FINAL.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Plucker, J. A., & Callahan, C. M. (2014). Research on giftedness and gifted education: Status of the field and considerations for the future. Exceptional Children, 80(4), 390–406.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Plucker, J. A., & Callahan, C. M. (2020). The evidence base for advanced learning programs. Phi Delta Kappan, 102(4), 14–21.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Plucker, J. A., & Peters, S. J. (2016). Excellence gaps in education: Expanding opportunities for talented students. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
   Google Scholar
• Redding, C., & Grissom, J. A. (2021). Do students in gifted programs perform better? Linking gifted program participation to achievement and nonachievement outcomes. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 43(3), 520–544.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Revelle, W., Wilt, J., & Condon, D. M. (2011). Individual differences and differential psychology: A brief history and prospect. In T. Chamorro-Premuzic, S. von Stumm, & A. Furnham (Eds.), The Wiley-Blackwell handbook of personality and individual differences (pp. 3–38). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley Blackwell. 10.1002/9781444343120.ch1
   Google Scholar
• Rinn, A. N., & Bishop, J. (2015). Gifted adults: A systematic review and analysis of the literature. Gifted Child Quarterly, 59(4), 213–235.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ritchie, S. J., & Tucker-Drob, E. M. (2018). How much does education improve intelligence? A meta-analysis. Psychological Science, 29(8), 1358–1369.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rivera, L. A. (2012). Hiring as cultural matching: The case of elite professional service firms. American Sociological Review, 77(6), 999–1022.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rocca, F. X. (2007). In Spain, inbreeding threatens academia. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 53(22), 31. Retrieved August 4, 2022, from https://www.chronicle.com/article/in-spain-inbreeding-threatens-academe/
   Google Scholar
• Rogers, K. B. (2007). Lessons learned about educating the gifted and talented: A synthesis of the research on educational practice. Gifted Child Quarterly, 51(4), 382–396.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rogers, K. B. (2015). The academic, socialization, and psychological effects of acceleration: Research synthesis. In S. G. Assouline, N. Colangelo, J. VanTassel-Baska, & A. E. Lupkowski-Shoplik (Eds.), A nation empowered: Evidence trumps the excuses holding back America’s brightest students (Vol. II, pp. 19–42). Iowa City, IA: The Belin-Blank Center for Gifted Education and Talent Education.
   Google Scholar
• Rosvall, M., & Bergstrom, C. T. (2008). Maps of random walks on complex networks reveal community structure. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105(4), 1118–1123.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schlotter, M., Schwerdt, G., & Woessman, L. (2011). Econometric methods for causal evaluation of education policies and practices: A non-technical guide. Education Economics, 19(2), 109–137.
   Google Scholar
• Schmidt, F. L. (2017). Beyond questionable research methods: The role of omitted relevant research in the credibility of research. Archives of Scientific Psychology, 5(1), 32–41.
   Google Scholar
• Sims, S., Anders, J., Inglis, M., & Lortie-Forgues, H. (2020). Quantifying ‘promising trials’ bias in randomized controlled trials in education. University College London, Centre for Education Policy and Equalising Opportunities (CEPEO), Working Paper No. 20-16.
   Google Scholar
• Singer, J. D. (2019). Reshaping the arc of quantitative educational research: It’s time to broaden our paradigm. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 12(4), 570–593.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Snow, R. E. (1996). Aptitude development and education. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 2(3–4), 536–560.
   Web of Science ®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.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Steenbergen-Hu, S., Makel, M. C., & Olszewski-Kublius, P. (2016). What one hundred years of research says about the effects of ability grouping and acceleration on K-12 students’ academic achievement: Findings of two second-order meta-analyses. Review of Educational Research, 86(4), 849–899.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Student Diversity Advisory Group. (2019). Making the grade II: New programs for better schools. Author.
   Google Scholar
• Subotnik, R. F., Olszewski-Kubilius, P., & Worrell, F. C. (2011). Rethinking giftedness and gifted education: A proposed direction forward based on psychological science. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 12(1), 3–54.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Subotnik, R. F., Olszewski-Kubilius, P., & Worrell, F. C. (2019). The psychology of high performance: Developing human potential into domain-specific talent. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
   Google Scholar
• Thompson, L. A., & Oehlert, J. (2010). The etiology of giftedness. Learning and Individual Differences, 20(4), 298–307.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tran, B., Wai, J., & McKenzie, S. C. (2021). Gifted education in Arkansas: A longitudinal study of gifted status and academic growth. Office for Education Policy, University of Arkansas, Arkansas Education Report, 18(9), 1–46.
   Google Scholar
• Tseng, V. (2012). The uses of research in policy and practice. Social Policy Report, 26(2), 1–23.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Tyack, D., & Cuban, L. (1995). Tinkering toward utopia: A century of public school reform. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• 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 Quaterly, 35(2), 92–98. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/001698629103500208?journalCode=gcqb
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wai, J. (2013). Investigating America’s elite: Cognitive ability, education, and sex differences. Intelligence, 41, 203–211.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wai, J. (2014). Experts are born, then made. Combining prospective and retrospective longitudinal data shows that cognitive ability matters. Intelligence, 45, 74–80.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wai, J., & Bailey, D. (2021). How intelligence research can inform education and public policy. In A. K. Barbey, S. Karama, & R. J. Haier (Eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Intelligence and Cognitive Neuroscience (pp. 434–447). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/9781108635462.028
   Google Scholar
• Wai, J., & Benbow, C. P. (2021). Educational interventions on behalf of the gifted: Do they have lasting links with development? In J. Van Tassel-Baska (Ed.), Talent development in gifted education: Theory, research, and practice (pp. 115–130). England, UK: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Wai, J., Brown, M. I., & Chabris, C. F. (2018). Using standardized test scores to include general cognitive ability in education research and policy. Journal of Intelligence, 6(3), 37.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wai, J., & Lakin, J. M. (2020). Finding the missing Einsteins: Expanding the breath of cognitive and noncognitive measures used in academic services. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 63, 101920. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2020.101920
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wai, J., & Lovett, B. J. (2021). Improving gifted talent development can help solve multiple consequential real-world problems. Journal of Intelligence, 9(2), 31.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wai, J., Lubinski, D., Benbow, C. P., & Steiger, J. H. (2010). Accomplishment in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) and its relation to STEM educational dose: A 25-year longitudinal study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(4), 860–871.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wai, J., & Rindermann, H. (2017). What goes into high educational and occupational achievement? Education, brains, hard work, networks, and other factors. High Ability Studies, 28(1), 127–145. doi:10.1080/13598139.2017.1302874
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wai, J., & Worrell, F. C. (2016). Helping disadvantaged and spatially talented students fulfill their potential: Related and neglected national resources. Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 3(1), 122–128.
   Google Scholar
• Wai, J., & Worrell, F. C. (2021). The future of intelligence research and gifted education. Intelligence, 87, 101546.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wraw, C., Deary, I. J., Gale, C. R., & Der, G. (2015). Intelligence in youth and health at age 50. Intelligence, 53, 23–32.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar