Ethical and Professional Practice Issues in the Provision of Educational Services to Gifted Students

  • Kristin C. Thompson

There have been many changes over the past 50–75 years in the provision of services to gifted children. As new theoretical positions and related discussions regarding “what is intelligence” have emerged in the literature (e.g., Gardner, 1983; Guilford, 1967; Renzulli, 1978; Sternberg, 1984; Thurstone, 1947), discussions regarding what constitutes “giftedness” have also taken place—with these discussions going beyond Terman’s (1926) restricted view of giftedness as referring to those individuals who score in the “…top 1% of general intellectual ability, as measured by the Stanford- Binet Intelligence scale or comparable instrument” (p.43).

In this chapter, we discuss the ethical and professional practice issues associated with the provision of educational assessment and intervention services to gifted children. We first begin with a discussion and commentary on the issues surrounding the definition of the term “giftedness,” followed by discussions and commentaries on the ethical and professional practice issues pertaining to the assessment and identification of gifted children, as well as the associated placement and curriculum issues that may arise. The chapter closes with a brief discussion of issues associated with providing counseling services to gifted children.**


Assessment Instrument Educational Service Gifted Student Gifted Child Inclusive Definition 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. American Psychological Association. (2002). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. American Psychologist, 57, 1060–1073.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anastasi, A., & Urbina, S. (1996). Psychological testing (7th ed.). New York: Prentice–Hall.Google Scholar
  3. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baker, E.L., & O’Neil, H.F., Jr. (1993). Policy and validity prospects for performance-based assessment. American Psychologist, 48, 1210–1217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Barkan, J.G., & Bernal, E.M. (1991). Gifted education for bilingual and limited English proficient students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 35, 144–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Baum, S.M., Olenchak, F.R., & Owen, S.V. (1998). Gifted students with attention deficits: Fact or fiction? Gifted Child Quarterly, 42, 96–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Callahan, C.M. (2005). Identifying gifted students from underrepresented populations. Theory Into Practice, 44, 98–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Carroll, J.B. (1982). The measurement of intelligence. In R.J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of human intelligence (pp. 29–120). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Clasen, D.R., & Clasen, R.E. (1995). Underachievement of highly able students and the peer society. Gifted and Talented International, 10, 67–76.Google Scholar
  10. Cohen, S.J. (1981). What is giftedness? A multidimensional approach. In A.H. Kramer (Ed.), Gifted children: Challenging their potential (pp. 33–45). New York: Trillium Press.Google Scholar
  11. Colangelo, N. (1991). Counseling gifted students: Issues and practices. In N. Colangelo & G.A. Davis (Eds.), Handbook of gifted education (pp. 273–284). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
  12. Colangelo, N., Assouline, S.G., & Gross, M.U.M. (2004). A nation deceived: How schools hold back America’s brightest students. Iowa City, IA: University of Iowa.Google Scholar
  13. Dickson, K. (2003). Gifted education and African American learners. In J.A. Castellano (Ed.), Special populations in gifted education: Working with diverse gifted learners (pp. 45–64). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
  14. DuVall, J., & Morris, R.J. (2006). Assessing mental retardation in death penalty cases: Critical issues for psychology and psychological practice. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 37,658–665.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Education Commission of the States. (2004). State gifted and talented definitions. Retrieved October 1, 2006, from
  16. Enright, K.M., & Ruzicka, M.F. (1989). Relationships between perceived parental behaviors and the self-esteem of gifted children. Psychological Reports, 65, 931–937.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Feldhusen, J. F. (1989). Synthesis of research on gifted youth. Educational Leadership, 46, 6–11.Google Scholar
  18. Feldhusen, J.F. (1992). Talent identification and development in education (TIDE). Sarasota, FL: Center for Creative Learning.Google Scholar
  19. Flowers, L.A., Milner, H.R., & Moore, J.L. (2003). Effects of locus control on African American high school seniors’ educational aspirations: Implications for preservice and inservice high school teachers and counselors. The High School Journal, 87, 39–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Ford, D.Y., & Harris, J.J. (1999). Multicultural gifted education. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  21. Ford, D.Y., Moore, J.L., & Harmon, D.A. (2005). Integrating multicultural and gifted education: A curricular framework. Theory Into Practice, 44, 125–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Fuchs, D., & Fuchs, L. (1989). Effects of examiner familiarity on black, Caucasian, and Hispanic children: A meta-analysis. Exceptional Children, 55, 303–308.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Gagné, F. (1985). Giftedness and talent. Reexamining a reexamination of the definitions. Gifted Child Quarterly, 29, 103–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gagné, F. (1995). From giftedness to talent: A developmental model and its impact on the language of the field. Roeper Review, 18, 103–111.Google Scholar
  25. Gallagher, J.J., & Gallagher, S.A. (1994). Teaching the gifted child (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
  26. Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  27. Gardner, H. (1997). Assessment in context: The alternative to standardized testing. In B. Roff (Ed.), Multiple intelligences and assessment (pp. 153–208). Arlington Heights, IL: Skylight.Google Scholar
  28. Genshaft, J.L., Bireley, M., & Hollinger, C.L. (Eds.). (1995). Serving gifted and talented students: A resource for school personnel. Austin, TX: PRO-ED.Google Scholar
  29. Genshaft, J.L., Greenbaum, S., & Borovsky, S. (1995). Stress and the gifted. In J.L. Genshaft, M. Bireley, & C.L. Hollinger (Eds.), Serving gifted and talented students: A resource for school personnel (pp. 257–268). Austin, TX: PRO-ED.Google Scholar
  30. Granada, J. (2003). Casting a wider net: Linking bilingual and gifted education. In J.A. Castellano (Ed.), Special populations in gifted education: Working with diverse gifted learners (pp. 1–16). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
  31. Guilford, J.P. (1967). The nature of human intelligence. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  32. Hébert, T.P., & Olenchak, F.R. (2000). Mentors for gifted underachieving males: Developing potential and realizing promise. Gifted Child Quarterly, 44, 196–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Johnsen, S.K. (2003). Issues in the assessment of talent development. In J.H. Borland (Ed.), Rethinking gifted education (pp. 201–214). New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  34. Kanaya, T., Ceci, S.J., & Scullin, M.H. (2003). The rise and fall of IQ in special education: Historical trends and their implications. Journal of School Psychology, 41, 453–465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Kim, K.H. (2005). Can only intelligent people be creative? The Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 16, 57–66.Google Scholar
  36. Kornhaber, M. (1999). Enhancing equity in gifted education: A framework for examining assessments drawing on the theory of multiple intelligences. High Ability Studies, 10, 143–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Lovecky, D.V. (1992). Exploring social and emotional aspects of giftedness in children. Roeper Review, 15, 18–25.Google Scholar
  38. Lovecky, D.V. (1993). The quest for meaning: Counseling issues with gifted children and adolescents. In L.K. Silverman (Ed.), Counseling the gifted and talented (pp. 29–47). Denver, CO: Love Publishing.Google Scholar
  39. Maker, C.J. (1994). Authentic assessment of problem solving and giftedness in secondary school students. The Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 6, 19–29.Google Scholar
  40. Maker, C.J. (1996). Identification of gifted minority students: A national problem, needed changes, and a promising solution. Gifted Child Quarterly, 40, 41–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. McBee, M.T. (2006). A descriptive analysis of referral sources for gifted identification screening by race and socioeconomic status. The Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 17, 103–111.Google Scholar
  42. Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary (11th ed). (2003). Springfield, MA: Merriam-Webster.Google Scholar
  43. Moon, S.M., Kelly, K.R., & Feldhusen, J.F. (1997). Specialized counseling services for gifted youth and their families: A needs assessment. Gifted Child Quarterly, 41, 16–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Morelock, M.J., & Feldman, D.H. (1992). The assessment of giftedness in preschool children. In E.V. Nuttall, I. Romero, & J. Kalesnik (Eds.), Assessing and screening preschoolers: Psychological and educational dimensions. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
  45. Naglieri, J.A., & Ford, D.Y. (2003). Addressing underrepresentation of gifted minority children using the Naglieri Nonverbal Ability Test (NNAT). Gifted Child Quarterly, 47, 155–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Naglieri, J.A., & Ford, D.Y. (2005). Increasing minority children’s participation in gifted classes using the NNAT: A response to Lohman. Gifted Child Quarterly, 49, 29–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. National Association of School Psychologists. (2000). Professional conduct manual. Bethesda, MD: Author.Google Scholar
  48. Oakes, J. (1985). Keeping track: How schools structure inequality. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  49. Pfeiffer, S.I. (2001). Professional psychology and the gifted: Emerging practice opportunities. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 32, 175–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Pfeiffer, S.I., Kumtepe, A., & Rosado, J. (2006). Gifted identification: Measuring change in a student’s profile of abilities using the Gifted Rating Scales. The School Psychologist, 60, 106–111.Google Scholar
  51. Reis, S.M., & McCoach, D.B. (2002). Underachievement in gifted students. In M. Neihart, S.M. Reis, N.M. Robinson, & S.M. Moon (Eds.), The social and emotional development of gifted children: What do we know? (pp. 81–91). Waco, TX: Prufrock.Google Scholar
  52. Renzulli, J.S. (1978). What makes giftedness? Reexamining a definition. Phi Delta Kappan, 60, 180–84.Google Scholar
  53. Renzulli, J.S. (2002). Emerging conceptions of giftedness: Building a bridge to the new century. Exceptionality, 10, 67–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Robinson, N.M., & Noble, K.D. (1991). Social-emotional development and adjustment in gifted children. In M.C. Wang, M.C. Reynolds, & H.J. Walberg (Eds.), Handbook of special education: Research and practice (pp. 57–76). New York: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
  55. Roth, P.L., BeVier, C.A., Bobko, P., Switzer, F.S., III, & Tyler, P. (2001). Ethnic group differences in cognitive ability in employment and educational settings: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 54, 297–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Sapon-Shevin, M. (1994). Playing favorites: Gifted education and the disruption of community. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  57. Silverman, L.K. (1993). Counseling the gifted and talented. Denver, CO: Love Publishing.Google Scholar
  58. Slavin, R.L. (1991). Are cooperative learning and ‘untracking’ harmful to the gifted? Response to Allan. Educational Leadership, 48, 68–71.Google Scholar
  59. Smutny, J.F. (2003). Designing and developing programs for gifted students. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.Google Scholar
  60. Stephen, K.R., & Karnes, F.A. (2000). State definitions for the gifted and talented revisited. Exceptional Children, 66, 219–238.Google Scholar
  61. Sternberg, R.J. (1984). Toward a triarchic theory of human intelligence. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 7, 269–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Sternberg, R.J., & Davidson, J.E. (1986). Conceptions of giftedness. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  63. Tannenbaum, A.J. (1983). Gifted children: Psychological and educational perspectives. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  64. Terman, L.M. (1926). Genetic studies of genius: Mental and physical traits of a thousand gifted children. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  65. Thurstone, L.L. (1947). Multiple factor analysis: A development and expansion of the vectors of mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  66. Treffinger, D.J. (1995). School improvement, talent development, and creativity. Roeper Review, 18, 93–97.Google Scholar
  67. U.S. Congress, Public Law 100–297, April 28, 1988.Google Scholar
  68. U.S. Department of Education. (1993). National excellence: A case for developing America’s talent. Washington, DC: Author.Google Scholar
  69. Wechsler, D. (2003). Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (4th ed.). San Antonio: TX: Psychological Corporation.Google Scholar
  70. Yoo, J.E., & Moon, S.M. (2006). Counseling needs of gifted students: An analysis of intake forms at a university-based counseling center. Gifted Child Quarterly, 50, 52–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kristin C. Thompson
    • 1
  1. 1.University of ArizonaUSA

Personalised recommendations