Table Of Content

Index, Volume 28, Nos. 1-4 An Evolving Field Mandated School-Improvement and Gifted Programs Cross, T. L. Moving the discussion from pathology to context: An interview Schneider, J. S. Effects of a legislated mandate: The comprehensive school with Larry Coleman. 28(1), 5-8. improvement process and middle-level gifted and talented programming. Gallagher, J. J. The chore of being counterintutitive. 28(4), 195. 28(4), 224-232. Gallagher, J. J. How to shoot oneself in the foot with program evaluation. 28(3), 122-124. Gallagher, J. J. Nurturing the innovative minority. 28(1), 9. Identification Discrepancies Henshon, S. E. Creative exploration: An interview with Don Treffinger. 28(3). Minton, B. & Pratt, S. A. Gifted and Highly Gifted Students: How Do They 119-121. Score on the SB5? 28(4), 232-237. Henshon, S. E. The evolution of creativity, giftedness, and multiple intelli- gences: An interview with Ellen Winner and Howard Gardner. 28(4). 191- Research Commentary Point-Counterpoint: Diagnosis of Giftedness 194, and ADHD Pyryt. M. The vision of Julian Stanley. 28(2), 62-63. Goerss, J.. Amend, E. R., Webb, J. T.. Webb, N.. & Beljan. P. Comments on Mika’s critique of Hartnett, Nelson, and Rinn’s article, “Gifted or ADHD? Dimensions of Creativity The possibilities of misdiagnosis’. 28(4), 249-251. Cropley, A. Creativity: A social approach. 28(3), 125-130. Mika. E. Giftedness, ADHD, and Overexcitabilities: The Possibilities of Mis- Ebrahim, F. Comparing creative thinking abilities and reasoning ability of information. 28(4), 237-243. deaf and hearing children. 28(3), 140-147. Nelson,J .M ., Rinn, A. N., & Hartnett, D. N. The possibility of misdiagnosis Wickes, K. S.. & Ward, T. B. Measuring gifted adolescents’ implicit theories of giftedness and ADHD still exists: A response to Mika. 28(4), 243-249. of creativity. 28(3), 131-139. Grappling with Complex Global Issues Recent Dissertation Research in Gifted Studies Volk, V. Expanding horizons: Into the future with confidence. 28(3), 175-178. Carman, C. A. (2005). Relationships among traditional and modern constructs von Karolyi,C . Issue awareness in young highly gifted children: Do the used in identifying giftedness. 28(2), 111. claims hold up? 28(3), 167-174. Mann, E. L. (2005). Mathematical Creativity and School Mathematics: Indi- cators of Mathematical Creativity in Middle School Students. 28(3), 179. Miller, E. M. (2006). Characteristic Centrality in the Perceptions of Gifted- Patterns of Self-Regulation ness as a Predictor of the Pattern of Nomination of Students for Placement Ruban, L., & Reis. S. M. Patterns of self-regulatory strategy use among low- in Gifted Programming. 28(3), 179. achieving and high-achieving university students, 28(3). 148-156 Moore. M. M. (2006). Variations in Test Anxiety and Locus of Control Orien- tation in Achieving and Underachieving Gifted and Nongifted Middle Sociopolitical and Cultural Contexts School Students. 28(4), 252. Ambrose, D. Aspiration growth, talent development, and self-fulfillment in a context of democratic erosion. 28(1), 11-19. Cross, J. R.. & Cross, T. L. Social dominance, moral politics. and gifted edu- Book Reviews cation. 28(1), 21-29. Barell, J. (2003). Developing more curious minds. 28(3), 180. Milner, H.R.. & Ford, D. Y. Racial experiences influence us as teachers Clark, G. & Zimmerman, E. (2004). Teaching talented art students: Principles Implications for gifted education curriculum development and implemen- and practices. 28(3), 180-181. tation. 28(1), 30-36. Lessow-Hurley, J. (2003). Meeting the needs of second language learners: An educator's guide. 28(2), 112. Talent Search Qualifying Plotz, D. (2005). The Genius Factory: Unravelling the Mysteries of the Nobel Lee. S-Y., & Olszewski-Kubilius, P. Comparisons Between Talent Search Stu- Prize Sperm Bank. 28(4), 253-254. dents Qualifying via Scores on Standardized Tests and via Parent Nomina Rakow, S. (2005) Educating gifted students in middle school: A practical tion. 28(3), 157-166. guide. 28(4), 253. Seligman, M. E. P. (2002). Authentic Happiness: Using the New Positive Psy- chology to Realize Your Potential for Lasting Fulfillment. 28(4), 254. Broader Conceptions of Leadership Tomlinson, C. A. & Strickland, C. A. (2005). Differentiation in practice: A Sternberg. R. J. WICS: A model of giftedness in leadership. 28(1), 37-44+ resource guide for differentiating curriculum. 28(3), 181. Conceptual Shifts and Evolving Terminology in the Field Book Reviewers Friedman-Nimz, R.. O’Brien, B.. & Frey, B. B. Examining our foundations Brecher, D. 28(4). 254. Implications for gifted education research. 28(1), 45-52 Cukierkorn, J. 28(3), 180-181. Freeman, J. 28(4), 253-254. Kitchen, J. 28(4), 253 Refinements, Bridges, and Themes in Our Conceptual Foundations Matthews, M. S. 28(2), 112. Cohen, L. M. Conceptual foundations for gifted education: Stock-taking Porath, M. 28(3), ISI. 28(2), 91-110. Schwartz, L. L. 28(3), 180. Dettmer, P. New blooms in established fields: Four domains of learning and doing. 28(2), 70-78. Folsom, C. Making conceptual connections between gifted and general edu cation: Teaching for intellectual and emotional learning (THIEL). 28(2), 79 87. Gagné, F., & Schader, R. M. Chance and talent development. 28(2). 88-90 Matthews, D. J.. & Foster, J. F.M ystery to mastery: Shifting paradigms in gifted education. 28(2), 64-69 Dimensions of Underachievement, Difficult Contexts, and Perceptions of Self Baslanti, U. & MeCoach, B. Factors affecting the underachievement of uni versity students. 28(4), 210-216 Chan, D. Adjustment problems. self-efficacy. and psychological distress among Chinese gifted students in Hong Kong. 28(4), 203-210 Matthews, M. Gifted students dropping out: Recent findings from a south eastern state. 28(4), 216-224 Neihart, M. Achievemenv/affiliation conflicts in gifted adolescents. 28(4). 196-203. Summer, 2006, Roeper Review/257