From the editor's desk.

Welcome to the second issue of volume 25 of the Roeper Review. Before I provide an overview of the issue I want to make mention of some things in the works. A new section of the journal called Point/Counter Point is being worked on behind the scenes. In it, I hope to provide a venue for thoughtful discourse on topics of interest in the field. I am optimistic that the section will help readers come to understand the nature of the difference of opinion among professionals in the field. Having worked in the field for twenty years and as editor of four journals about gifted students, it is my opinion that there is far too little discussion going on. This section should help change that fact. If you have suggestions for topics or individuals to defend a point/counterpoint, please contact me.

Another new section is actually a return to one that Ruthan Brodsky, the former Roeper Review editor, used to include in the journal. It is a review of dissertations germane to the field. I always enjoyed this section and am thankful that Ruthan had the forethought to originate it.

This issue contains six very interesting and thought-provoking articles and three reviews of books. The first four articles cover quite a bit of intellectual ground, offering the reader considerable information about the lives of gifted students in school. In the first article entitled "State Standardized Testing Programs: Friend or Foe of Gifted Education?," authors Tonya Moon, Catherine Birighton, and Carolyn Callahan report on how state testing affected the instructional practices of teachers in their study. In addition, the authors were interested in the effects of the instructional practices on their gifted students' attitudes toward school and motivation. Their findings represent many educators' assumptions about the effects of high-stakes testing on instruction. This study articulates what many around the country have been discussing. More specifically, the article provides evidence concerning the advantages and disadvantages of state testing that are being discussed.

Betsy McCoach and Del Siegle found in their analysis that gifted and general education students differ in their academic self-perceptions. Their study, described in the article "The Structure and Function of Academic Self-Concept in Gifted and General Education Students," utilized a sophisticated statistical technique called structural equation modeling. A second finding was that "GPA and academic self-perceptions were moderately and positively related" in both groups. Knowing how to work with gifted students in an effective manner is directly related to the extent to which we understand them. This study points out both differences and similarities among gifted and nongifted students on academic self-concept.

Meredith Greene addresses the different career counseling needs of gifted students in her article "Gifted Adrift? Career Counseling of the Gifted and Talented." Common issues in the literature base including "multipotentiality, career needs of females, perfectionism, and early cognitive and vocational maturity" are included to set the stage for the recommended future directions. Assisting in the career development of gifted students is very important to their psychological well being. Building on our previous findings allows for important nuances to be included in our counseling practice.

In the fourth article, preservice and in-service teachers were asked about characteristics and behaviors that might apply to either gifted students of students identified with emotional/behavioral disorder (EBD). The authors, Mary Rizza and William Morrison, report that their findings are interesting because they reveal "stereotypical thinking in the identification of characteristics of the student labeled EBD". The level of training of the teachers affected the degree to which their attitudes were stereotypical. The article is entitled "Uncovering Stereotypes and Identifying Characteristics of Gifted Students and Students With Emotional/Behavioral Disabilities." Such research is important in improving educators' ability to locate students with special needs and provide appropriate services.

The second group of articles has been organized under the heading of "International Perspectives." In the first piece, "From Pentagon to Triangle: A Cross-Cultural Investigation of an Implicit Theory of Giftedness," Li-fang Zhang and Sammy King-fai Hui, examine an implicit theory of giftedness among preservice Chinese teachers. Participants responded to an inventory based on Sternberg and Zhang's (1995) pentagonal implicit theory of giftedness. Chinese views of giftedness differ significantly from American views. Studies such as this one provide a valuable "international perspective."

In the final article, "Thirty Years After: The Lives of Former Winners of Mathematical Olympiads," Alexander Karp addresses the question: What became of people who were considered mathematically gifted in childhood? His subjects were winners of the St. Petersburg (Russia) Olympiad. The "math culture" of the Russian school system is strongly tied to the accomplishments of these exceptional students.

In addition to the articles, three book reviews have been provided by the Roeper Review Book Review Editor, Dr. Claire Hughes. Combined, these six articles and three book reviews provide very interesting and thoughtful commentary on matters related to gifted students.

I hope you find this issue of the Roeper Review as interesting as I have and, should you have any questions or comments, please direct them to me at the address below.

Tracy L. Cross, Ph. D., Editor
Roeper Review
Indiana Academy for Science,
  Mathematics and Humanities
Ball State University
Muncie, Indiana 47306
[e-mail]