Gifted Preschoolers: Parent and Teacher Views on Identification, Early Admission and Programming.

An exploration of the issues and concerns of the parents of gifted preschoolers and preschool/kindergarten teachers surrounding early identification and programming for giftedness was undertaken using a survey. The majority of parents reported that early identification can (91%) and should (74%) be done, while teachers acknowledged each at 78% and 50% respectively. The practice of differentiated curriculum was supported by 76% of parents and 32% of teachers surveyed, while the educational option of early entrance was supported by 37% of parents and 7% of teachers. The physical domain was superseded by both social-emotional and intellectual domains in the levels of importance for early entrance consideration by both respondent groups. Parental requests for information were categorized as resources for additional challenge, disciplinary techniques, educational options, and parenting guidelines. Teachers required information on balancing differing development rates and supportive programming. A number of professionals were acknowledged by both groups as beneficial to acquiring requested information, including school staff, support groups, medical staff, psychologists, the media, and political lobbyists.

Critical to improving the chances for optimal development is the need for identification of and intervention with those with special needs at an early age (Guralnick & Bennett, 1987). This is true for all exceptionalities, including the gifted and talented. Unfortunately, unlike the other areas of exceptionality, gifted education has not been perceived as an area of concern because of the belief that the gifted are able to work it out for themselves (Delisle, 1992). Yet, children within this exceptionality have unique needs and ignoring one or some developmental aspect can cause deleterious effects.

This article documents issues investigated by surveys completed by parents and preschool/kindergarten teachers about the preschool gifted. The survey's findings were divided into two articles. The first, which reported characteristics of preschool gifted children, was presented at the 11th WCGTC Conference in Hong Kong (Sankar-DeLeeuw, 1995) and later published in its proceedings (Sankar-DeLeeuw, 1997). This article discusses commonalities and differences in parent and teacher support for early identification, differentiated curriculum, and early entry. It also provides information about raising and teaching this population.

Literature Review of Preschool Gifted

The review of the literature provides a theoretical framework for this study. It includes a discussion of terminology (giftedness and preschooler), characteristics of gifted preschoolers and their cognitive, social and emotional development. Research involving the parents and teachers of gifted children is also summarized.

Definitions of Giftedness and Preschooler

There are many competing conceptions of giftedness (Sternberg & Davidson, 1986) with definitions of giftedness ranging from a single intellectual dimension (Terman, 1925) to the recognition of multiple abilities and intelligences (Gardner, 1983; Guilford, 1956; Marland, 1972; Renzulli, 1978; Sternberg, 1981). Morelock and Feldman (1992) present the following definition of gifted children in their chapter on The Assessment of Giftedness in Preschool Children:

      Gifted children are those showing sustained evidence of advanced
   capability relative to their peers in general academic skills and/or in
   more specific domains (music, art, science, etc.) to the extent that they
   need differentiated educational programming (p. 302).

The age designation for the term preschooler has been consistently defined in the literature. However, there has been inconsistent age references to the term young. Refer to Figure 1 which summarizes a number of studies. Collectively, the studies span birth to over twelve years. This is slightly different from Moss (1990) who states that the terms young and preschooler have been used to refer to a variety of age spans, or none at all (Moss, 1990). Caution is warranted in the interpretation of studies on the preschool gifted; information gleaned from a resource requires careful consideration of the definition of giftedness utilized by the author and the age designation given to preschooler. This study designates a preschooler as between the ages of 3 1/2 and 6 years.

Figure 1.

"Young" Gifted: Age variance in research studies

Researcher(s)                    Reference Term

Abraham & Hartwell (1985)        "gifted children", "preschool
                                  child"
Bagnato & Neisworth (1981)       "early intervention"
Benbow (1986)                    "identified early"
Burke(1989)                      "young gifted"
Burns & Tunnard (1991)           "gifted preschoolers"
Ehrlich (1980)                   "giftedness in the early years"
Fatouros (1986)                  "giftedness in very young children"
Gottfried, Gottfried,            "early developmental aspects"
 Bathurst, & Guerin (1994)
Johnson & Lewman (1990)          "young gifted boys and girls"
Karnes (1983)                    "young gifted children"
Kitano (1989)                    "young gifted children"
Kitano (1990)                    "young children"
Lehman & Erdwins (1981)          "young intellectually-gifted
                                  children"
Lehman & Erdwins (1981)          "younger gifted children"
Louis, Feiring, & Lewis (1992)   "gifted preschoolers"
Mathews & Burns (1987)           "preschool gifted child"
Roedell (1986)                   "young gifted children"
Roedell, Jackson, &              "gifted young children"
 Robinson (1980)
Sandel, McCallister,             "preschool gifted children"
 & Nash (1993)
Silverman (1986)                 "young gifted children"
Smutny & Blocksom (1990)         "preschool gifted children"
Smutny, Veenker,                 "gifted child"
 & Veenker (1989)
Smutny, Veenker,                 "gifted preschooler"
 & Veenker (1989)
Webb, Meckstroth,                "gifted child"
 & Tolan (1982)
Wexler-Sherman, Gardner,         "early assessment"
 & Feldman (1988)
Wexler-Sherman, Gardner,         "young children"
 & Feldman (1988)
Wolf (1989)                      "young gifted children"
Wolfe (1989)                     "gifted preschooler"
Wright (1990)                    "precocious preschoolers"

(adapted from Sankar-            X X X X X Ages emphasized in study
 DeLeeuw, 1997)                  / / / / / Ages noted in study

Researcher(s)                              Ages Applied
                                 Birth   1   2   3   4   5   6   7

Abraham & Hartwell (1985)                        /   /   /   /
Bagnato & Neisworth (1981)         X     X   X   X   X   X   X   X
Benbow (1986)
Burke(1989)                                  X   X   X   X   X   X
Burns & Tunnard (1991)                           X   X
Ehrlich (1980)                                   X   X   X   X   X
Fatouros (1986)                                  X   X
Gottfried, Gottfried,                    X   X   X   X   X   X   X
 Bathurst, & Guerin (1994)
Johnson & Lewman (1990)                          X   X
Karnes (1983)                                            X   X   X
Kitano (1989)                                            X
Kitano (1990)                                X   X   X   X   /
Lehman & Erdwins (1981)
Lehman & Erdwins (1981)
Louis, Feiring, & Lewis (1992)                   X   X   X
Mathews & Burns (1987)                           X   X   X
Roedell (1986)                                   X   X   X   X
Roedell, Jackson, &                          /   X   X   X   /
 Robinson (1980)
Sandel, McCallister,                         X   X   X   X
 & Nash (1993)
Silverman (1986)                                 X   X   X   X   X
Smutny & Blocksom (1990)                             X   X
Smutny, Veenker,                         X   X   X   X   X   X   X
 & Veenker (1989)
Smutny, Veenker,                                 X   X   X
 & Veenker (1989)
Webb, Meckstroth,                            /   /   /   /   /   /
 & Tolan (1982)
Wexler-Sherman, Gardner,                             X   X
 & Feldman (1988)
Wexler-Sherman, Gardner,                             X   X
 & Feldman (1988)
Wolf (1989)                                      X   X   X   X
Wolfe (1989)                                     X   X
Wright (1990)                                    X   X   X

(adapted from Sankar-
 DeLeeuw, 1997)

Researcher(s)                        Ages Applied
                                 8   9   10   11   12+

Abraham & Hartwell (1985)
Bagnato & Neisworth (1981)       /   /   /    /     /
Benbow (1986)                        /   /    /     X
Burke(1989)                      X
Burns & Tunnard (1991)
Ehrlich (1980)
Fatouros (1986)
Gottfried, Gottfried,            X
 Bathurst, & Guerin (1994)
Johnson & Lewman (1990)
Karnes (1983)                    X
Kitano (1989)
Kitano (1990)                    /   /   /    /     /
Lehman & Erdwins (1981)          X   X   X    X     X
Lehman & Erdwins (1981)          X   X   X    X     X
Louis, Feiring, & Lewis (1992)
Mathews & Burns (1987)
Roedell (1986)                   /   /   /    /
Roedell, Jackson, &              /   /   /    /
 Robinson (1980)
Sandel, McCallister,
 & Nash (1993)
Silverman (1986)                 X
Smutny & Blocksom (1990)
Smutny, Veenker,
 & Veenker (1989)
Smutny, Veenker,
 & Veenker (1989)
Webb, Meckstroth,                /   /   /    /     /
 & Tolan (1982)
Wexler-Sherman, Gardner,
 & Feldman (1988)
Wexler-Sherman, Gardner,
 & Feldman (1988)
Wolf (1989)
Wolfe (1989)
Wright (1990)

(adapted from Sankar-
 DeLeeuw, 1997)

Characteristics of Gifted Preschoolers

There is some similarity in descriptors used in characterizing the preschool gifted. Developmental unevenness, or asynchrony, has been noted by a number of researchers (Delisle, 1990; Hollingworth, 1942; Webb, Meckstroth, & Tolan, 1982). "The dissonance between the 10-year-old brain, the 7-year-old body, and the 6-year old social response system...is easily understood by children and adults alike and fraught with psychological pitfalls" (Genshaft, Bireley, & Hollinger, 1995, p. x).

The preschool gifted have been described by their parents as: divergent thinkers, highly focused on their interests, curious, becoming early readers, and persistent. They also described them as possessing: high verbal ability (including large vocabularies for their age) at an early age, an unusual sense of humor, an unusual ability to make abstract connections in learning, and a keen perceptiveness a wide range of interests, yet a demonstrated ability in a single area.(Louis & Lewis, 1992; Roedell, 1989; Tuttle, Becker, & Sousa, 1988; Webb et al., 1982).

Characterizations of the preschool gifted by teachers, however, has not been an area of focus in the literature. Rohrer (1995) found a two-dimensional conception of giftedness to be held by four primary (two kindergarten and two first grade) teachers: classroom performance (extremely unusual intellectual and/or academic ability) and affective style (intensity, high visibility, and/or uniqueness). Sankar-DeLeeuw (1995, 1997) found a strong similarity (91%) in parents' and teachers' characterizations of the early abilities indicative of young gifted children. Yet, teachers also reported traits which were not reported by parents, including discordant development, emotional immaturity, socialization difficulties, and a tendency of being pushed by parents,

Cognitive Development Specific to Gifted Preschoolers

There are a number of developmental differences from the general population which have been detected by parents of gifted children, including greater awareness and intensity from birth, and early language ability (Maxwell, 1995). Kitano's (1985) study of gifted preschoolers found a number of cognitive-related behaviors demonstrated, including high levels of accumulated knowledge and thinking abilities, spontaneous incorporation of academic activities in free play, and prelogical thinking. In addition, an avoidance of and discomfort with ambiguity was observed.

Social and Emotional Development Specific to Gifted Preschoolers

The beginning of preschool or kindergarten can be a critical time for gifted preschoolers. They often cannot find peers at their level with similar interests, which can result in frustration and boredom (Hollingworth, 1942; Webb et al., 1982). They may develop fear or anxiety about going to school and choose to hide their gifts. In general, they often have difficulty understanding "why other children cannot keep up with them and why teachers fail to stimulate them to the degree that they need" (Kerr, 1991, p. 124).

When solving hypothetical social conflicts, advanced verbal social-cognitive abilities of gifted preschoolers have been reported, even when the behavioral output could not be demonstrated (Roedell, 1989; Gottfried, Gottfried, Bathurst, & Guerin, 1994). However, it was reported that some found it difficult to share (Roedell, 1989; Roedell, Jackson, & Robinson, 1980). Their advanced vocabulary and unusual fluency can actually make it difficult for them to relate to others. To the contrary, Lehman and Erdwins (1981) found that young gifted children feel more comfortable with themselves and report more positive feelings regarding themselves and others than their peers.

Research on the affective development of gifted preschoolers could not be located.

Parents

Not only has there been a recent increased intensity and quality of parental involvement in early childhood services, the role of families in these services also has had a larger emphasis (Paget, 1992). Between birth and the age of five years, families have the primary responsibility in the development of their children's competencies. However, there are special needs and problems within the families of gifted children such as parents being accused of pressuring and pushing their children (Rimm, 1995).

Johnson and Lewman (1990) reported gender-stereotypic patterns of parents' perceptions of their children's (3- and 4- year-olds) abilities. Leisure activities were more frequently dance and fine art/motor skills for girls and convergent games and building for boys. Vocabulary was noted as outstanding for girls, while the boys' noted outstanding abilities were in abstraction, curiosity, and problem solving. Parents "recognize their child's potential prior to the time that educators test for giftedness status, which is typically in the early elementary years" (Gottfried et al., 1994, p. 29).

Teachers of Preschool Gifted Children

Teacher identification of the gifted has been reportedly more difficult as the child's chronological age decreases (Fatouros, 1986). Preschool gifted children require teachers who provide learning opportunities- intellectual, social and personal- which facilitate positive school life adaptations. Yet, working with these students often involves dealing with their boredom because of repetitive, unchallenging tasks and their frustrations because they are unable to accomplish tasks due to growth or developmental discrepancies.

Teachers do play an important role in the prevention of bad study habits, social behavior and self-esteem problems, and disinterest, underachievement, and boredom in school by this group. However, as suggested by Roedell (1989), early childhood educators are unfamiliar with indicators of exceptional potential, and gifted educators are unfamiliar with developmentally appropriate practices.

Summary of Literature Review

This literature review provides a framework for the study reported in this article. The terms giftedness and preschooler were discussed, and the age appointment for preschooler has been assigned between 3 1/2 and 6 years. Characteristics and development of the preschool gifted were reviewed.

Caution is warranted in applying the findings of research conducted on older gifted children on the preschool gifted. This is particularly true in the area of emotional development; sensitivities, criticalness, and perfectionism cannot automatically be implied to this population.

Research studies discussing parents and teachers in relation to the gifted preschool children have also been presented. The need for a comprehensive investigation into the views of parents and teachers about young gifted children, identification, early admission and programming does not exist in the literature and such information is necessary for successful collaborations by these groups to identify program for this population.

The Survey

An exploratory study of the issues and concerns of the parents of gifted preschoolers and preschool/kindergarten teachers surrounding early identification and programming for giftedness was undertaken using an author-generated survey entitled Giftedness in Young Children Survey. The survey was designed to examine teacher and parent attitudes toward issues associated with the identification of giftedness in this population, including their characteristics, the concept of early school entry and other information deemed relevant by theses parents and teachers. Both teacher and parent forms were identical except for question #3 which inquired whether the person was raising a gifted preschooler or teaching a gifted preschooler.

A letter of introductory remarks and initial questions focused parents and teachers on the 3 1/2 to 6 year old age group. The parents were asked the close-ended question: Do you have, or have you had, a child in preschool or kindergarten that you suspect is, or suspected at the time was, gifted (regardless of any identification that occurred after age 6)? The teachers were asked the close-ended question: Have you ever had a child in your preschool or kindergarten class that you suspected was gifted? All teacher and parent respondents replied in the affirmative. The survey then asked the research questions and concluded with an option to provide personal information (name, address, telephone number), involvement in gifted education on the parent version (i.e., as parent, ABC member, teacher, principal), and other grades taught on the teacher version. Each mailout was accompanied by a letter of introduction and a self-addressed, stamped envelope. The same deadline was given as a return date for both groups.

Methodology

Sample

This study took place predominantly in Edmonton, Alberta and some parent surveys were completed by respondents in Calgary. Both Edmonton and Calgary are large, western Canadian cities with rich multi-cultural societies and good public school systems attended by all but a very small percentage of school-aged children. Respondents were not asked to indicate racial, marital, or SES particulars because, given the range of diversity within the population sampled, such particulars may have identified respondents. Parents were not asked to identify exceptional educational characteristics (i.e., ADHD, LD). The number of boys and girls was approximately equal.

Due to time and budgetary constraints, the parent survey was circulated to 91 randomly selected members of the 159 members in the Alberta Associations for Bright Children and the Association for Bright Children - Edmonton. The response rate was 51% and anonymity was maintained by 19% of the parent surveys returned.

The teacher survey was circulated to 44 preschool teachers randomly selected from a directory of 112 preschools licensed in the Edmonton area by the Edmonton Preschool Association (EPA) and 10 kindergarten teachers contacted through Kindergarten Showcase, a conference held by the Edmonton Public School Board to introduce various issues to parents who have children entering kindergarten in the upcoming academic year. The teacher response rate was 52% and anonymity was maintained by 32% of the teacher surveys returned.

Procedure

The remaining ten questions of the Giftedness in Young Children survey, not addressed in Sankar-DeLeeuw (1995, 1997), are the focus of this article. Data from the close-ended questions was inputted into preset spreadsheets, and broken down by question. Modifications were made to the spreadsheets analyzing the open-ended questions to allow individual responses and groups of responses to be reported.

Analysis

Comparisons were made between parent and teacher response frequencies. Statements were also used to qualify respondents' concerns on specific issues. Correlations were run to determine what relationships, if any, exist between respondents' answers to the questions (with the exception of the open-ended Question #3 as a wide variety in responses was reported here). The responses to these questions form the basis for this article.

Results and Discussion

Question 1: Do you believe that giftedness can be identified between the ages of 3 1/2 and 6 years? Ninety-one percent (91%) of parents believed that giftedness can be identified at early ages, while 78% of the teachers surveyed reported that identification can be made early.

Question 2: Do you believe that giftedness should be identified between the ages of 3 1/2 and 6 years? Seventy-four percent (74%) of parent respondents believed that the preschool gifted should be identified, in contrast to 50% of the teachers. A qualification to a parent's yes answer was that "frustration and a desire to fit in strike early; the brightest are often the best chameleons, acting like everyone else, and inwardly cursing their difference". A parent who replied "no" qualified the answer with "parents tend to know how to nurture their children, and the parents are the major influence at this stage". Three parent respondents checked both yes and no; one of them stated that "it depends on how well the child and parents are coping". Two parents did not respond to this question.

Two teacher respondents checked both yes and no, and two teachers did not answer. Two teachers supporting identification noted "every child's individuality should be respected and their developmental timetable encouraged" and "... because giftedness is a special need and if identified early enough we can provide special programming; they won't be labeled [sic] as having a "behavioral" problem".

Question 3: What additional information would you have found beneficial to raise/teach a gifted child? What professionals could have provided such information? Additional information requested by parents included resources for additional challenge (materials, toys and methods), information on disciplinary techniques (anger management, coping with high emotional rages, frustration, and independence), educational options (testing early, learning styles, thought processes, types of intelligences, dealing with systems which "hold gifted children back"), and parenting guidelines (individuality, creativeness, imagination, high energy levels, affective qualities, coping with natural disasters/wars/frightening events, socialization with adults and older agemates). Creel and Karnes (1988) found parents reported a need for information on available programs, discipline, underachievement and advocacy.

Teacher respondents varied in the information they reported beneficial from an educator's standpoint. The information requested was how to balance different rates of development to prevent frustration, and advocacy for, and education about, supportive programming (i.e., definition of gifted, activities - both challenging and play-based, "success rate" for acceleration - academically and socially). One respondent stated how "being a parent of a gifted child helps". Another reported that tests should not be "available to test 3 year-olds ... too many parents think they can `create' a gifted child", while yet another stated "at this age, it's probably best not to know. I don't feel that preschool programs should be heavily academic. Gifted children need to learn how to play before they begin formal learning".

Professionals whom parents believed would be helpful were psychologists (child and family counselors, psychometrists), school staff (principals, teachers, special needs teachers, school counselors, preschool/daycare staff), parent support groups (Association for Bright Children), medical staff (doctors, pediatricians, public health nurse), media consultants and radio talk shows, and political lobbyists. One respondent generally stated "those that understand".

Professionals noted by teacher respondents were school staff (consultants, educators and counselors), psychologists, child development specialists (capable of identifying norms for different age groups), speech clinicians, sociologists, parents (who seek extra stimulation supportive of their children), guest speakers/workshops, and the Association for Bright Children.

Question 4: Do you believe that gifted children in this age group require a curriculum that is different from average in order to meet their unique needs? Seventy-six percent (76%) of the parents surveyed believed that preschool gifted children require a different curriculum, and 32% of the teachers agreed. Two parents' qualifications to affirmative responses stated "they need challenges even at a young age" and "Early Childhood Services (ECS) requires [sic] children to move quickly from one activity to another and [it] is frustrating to those who can concentrate and want to spend more time on projects". A teacher opposing this practice stated "I've had success with providing open-ended activities. These kind of children often take more time to complete a regular activity because of detail and excellence in quality". Another teacher noted that "gifted children will excel [sic] in any program; however, a program geared specifically to enhance their skills would allow them to progress further".

Question 5: Do you believe that gifted preschoolers should be admitted to kindergarten at a younger age than specified by the Early Childhood Services (ECS) entry age criteria? Thirty-seven percent (37%) of the parents, but only 7% of teachers, agreed with early entrance into kindergarten. Braga (1971) also found negative attitudes by primary teachers toward early entrance. A qualification made by a parent's affirmative answer stated "our daughter ... is currently reading Charlotte's Web. She has to wait until September ... to enter ECS to learn A B C D ... why?". A parent opposing this option stated "the preschool years can be so wonderful for a parent (s) to develop security, self-esteem, moral values, friendship, trust, etc. that are so very much needed before academic intervention. A child needs to be a child. Their brilliance can take away some childhood years." A teacher supporting early entry stated "if they are physically and emotionally mature (and many are!), they actually benefit from a group setting," whereas a teacher opposing it noted "definitely not. They need time to develop socially and emotionally as well. (In many cases it is even more necessary for these children)."

Question 6: What characteristics are important in the determinance of early entrance of a child? physical? intellectual? social/emotional? if all, equally? Although 7% of teachers agreed with early entrance, all but two answered this question.

Forty-one percent (41%) of parent respondents acknowledged the importance of physical characteristics (i.e., gross and fine motor skills, height, weight) in the determinance of early entrance of a child, yet this domain was believed to be important by 65 % of teacher respondents. Two parent respondents were unsure how to answer.

The intellectual domain was considered to be important for early entrance consideration by 70% of the parents and 73% of the teachers. One parent respondent and one teacher respondent were unsure how to answer.

Social-emotional development was considered to be important for early entrance consideration by 89% of the parents, and 92% of the teachers. One parent respondent checked both yes and no for this domain and one parent was unsure how to answer.

Thirty-three percent (33%) of parents believed all three domains had equal importance in early entrance consideration, while 43% did not report these domains to have equal importance and thirteen percent (13%) were unsure or did not believe in the practice of early entrance. A fairly even division exists between teachers who consider all three domains to be equal and those who do not, 42% and 46% respectively.

The greatest concern indicated by both parent and teacher respondent groups was in reference to the social maturity of early entrants, while the physical development was of least concern. Some similarity exists with McCluskey and Walker (1986) warning that "students who are accelerated, though qualified academically, may be too immature socially, physically, and emotionally to achieve at the higher level of placement" (p. 12).

There have been few documented studies focusing on these domains in the early years (Austin & Draper, 1981; Horowitz, 1987; Janos & Robinson, 1985; Lehman & Erdwins, 1981; Roedell, Jackson, & Robinson, 1980). Nonintellectual characteristics of the gifted child have received less attention than characteristics of an academic and intellectual nature (Clark, 1992; Gottfried et al., 1994; Webb et al., 1982). Yet this study revealed that both parents and teachers acknowledge domains, other than intellectual, as important, and in the case of teachers social/emotional and physical domains are as equally important as the intellectual domain.

Correlations: Presentation of correlations of responses to the questions (except #3) by parents, and by teachers is charted in Table 1. Parent variables are not correlated with teacher variables.

Table 1

Pearson's R correlations for parent and tether responds

                              PARENT
           1           2        4           5        6a

T    1                 0.015    0.437(*)   -0.038    0.049
e    2     0.460(*)            -0.126       0.038    0.062
a    4     0.179       0.084               -0.211    0.203
c    5     0.135       0.117    0.436(*)            -0.072
h    6a    0.184      -0.181   -0.008       0.013
e    6b    0.128      -0.178   -0.030      -0.010    0.957(***)
r    6c    0.135      -0.195   -0.119      -0.022    0.981(***)
     6d    0.124      -0.168   -0.034       0.024    0.962(*)

                       PARENT
             6b           6c            6d

T    1      -0.132        0.021        -0.087
e    2       0.077        0.032        -0.040
a    4       0.053        0.060        -0.051
c    5       0.219        0.101         0.127
h    6a      0.071        0.493(***)    0.195
e    6b                   0.326*       -0.025
r    6c      0.959(***)                 0.321(*)
     6d      0.955(***)   0.956(***)

Key:

1 can giftedness be identified between the ages of 3 1/2 and 6 years old?

2 should giftedness be identified between the ages of 3 1/2 and 6 years old?

4 do gifted children in this age group require a different curriculum?

5 should gifted preschoolers be admitted to kindergarten at a younger age?

6a are physical characteristics important in the determinance of early entrance?

6b are intellectual characteristics important in the determinance of early entrance?

6c are social/emotional characteristics important in the determinance of early entrance?

6d do intellectual, physical, and social/emotional domains have equal importance?

(*) p<0.05 (**) p<0.01 (***) p<0.001

There was no significant correlation between parent responses as to whether early identification can and should be practiced. Parents did show a significant pairing of whether early identification can occur and the provision of differentiated curriculum. In addition, with respect to early entrance, parents acknowledged the importance of the social with physical and intellectual domains, and the equal importance of each domain.

A significant correlation was found between teacher responses to can and should early identification occur. Yet, within the 78% agreement that early identification can occur, the respondents were equally divided (50%) as to whether it should. Teacher respondents also significantly indicated that if a gifted child was in their classroom, they were willing to amend or differentiate curriculum and also agreed with the option of early admittance for that child.

Conclusion

This article explores the commonalities and discrepancies between parent and teacher conceptions of giftedness and views on identification, early admission and programming within this age range which have not previously been addressed. Early identification has been recommended and supported (Bloom, 1985; Feldman, 1980) and the importance of appropriate environmental support stressed (Feldman & Goldsmith, 1986). Yet, only half the surveyed teachers in this study believed that early identification should be done. Great discrepancy exists between parents and teachers surveyed as to the value of the educational option of early entry. The study shows that parents are more likely to perceive a need to individualize (and accelerate) very bright children than are the teachers who will have such children in their classrooms. However, the teachers' perspectives of early entrance were consistent in their equitable view of each domain- physical, intellectual, social/emotional)

REFERENCES

Abraham, W., & Hartwell, L.K. (1985). Early identification of the preschool child: A study of parent and teacher effectiveness. Gifted Education International, 3, 127-129.

Austin, A.B., & Draper, D.C. (1981). Peer relationships of the academically gifted: A review. Gifted Child Quarterly, 25, 129-133.

Bagnato, S.J., & Neisworth, J.T. (1981). Linking developmental assessment and curricula: Prescriptions for early intervention. Rockville, MD: Aspen.

Benbow, C. (1986). SMPY's model for teaching mathematically precocious students. In J.S. Renzulli (Ed.), Systems and models for developing programs for the gifted and talented.

Bloom, B.S. (1985). Developing talent in young people. New York: Ballantine.

Braga, J.L. (1971). Early admission: Opinion versus evidence. Elementary School Journal, 72, 35-46.

Burke, L. (1989). Identifying and serving the young gifted: A program for reaching classroom teachers. Gifted Child Today, July/Aug, 10-12.

Burns, J.M., & Tunnard, J.D. (1991). Public programming for precocious preschoolers. Gifted Child Today, Nov/Dec, 56-60.

Clark, B. (1992). Growing Up Gifted: Developing the Potential of Children at Home and at School (4th ed.). New York, NY: Macmillan Publishing.

Creel, C.S., & Karnes, F.A. (1988). Parental expectancies and young gifted children. Roeper Review, 11, 48-50.

Delisle, J. R. (1991)). The gifted adolescent at risk: Strategies and resources for suicide prevention among gifted youth. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 13, 212-28.

Delisle, J. R. (1992). Guiding the Social and Emotional Development of Gifted Youth: A Practical Guide for Educators and Counselors. White Plains, NY: Longman.

Ehrlich, V.Z. (1980). Identifying giftedness in the early years: From three to seven. In S. Kaplan (Ed.), Educating the preschool/primary gifted and talented. Ventura, CA: National/State Leadership Training Institute on the Gifted and Talented.

Fatouros, C. (1986). Early identification of gifted children is crucial.., but how should we go about it? Gifted Education International, 4, 24-28.

Feldman, D.H. (1980). Beyond universals in cognitive development. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

Feldman, D.H., & Goldsmith, L.T. (1986). Nature's gambit - child prodigies and the development of human potential. New York: Basic Books.

Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. New York: Basic Books.

Genshaft, J.L., Bireley, M., & Hollinger, C.L. (1995). Serving gifted and talented students: A resource for school personnel. Austin, TX: Pro-ed.

Gottfried, A.W., Gottfried, A.E., Bathurst, K., & Guerin, D.W. (1994). Gifted IQ Early developmental aspects: The Fullerton Longitudinal Study. New York: Plenum.

Guilford, J. (1956). The structure of intellect. Psychological Bulletin, 53, 267-293.

Guralnick, M.J., & Bennett, F.C. (1987). A framework for early intervention. In M.J. Guralnick, & F.C. Bennett (Eds.), The effectiveness of early intervention for at-risk & handicapped children. Orlando, FL: Academic.

Hollingworth, L.S. (1942). Children above 180 IQ, Stanford-Binet: Origin and development. New York: World Book.

Horowitz, F.D. (1987). A development view of giftedness. Gifted Child Quarterly, 31, 165-168.

Janos, P.M., & Robinson, N.M. (1985). Psychosocial development in intellectually gifted children. In F.D. Horowitz & M. O'Brien (Eds.), The gifted and talented (pp. 149-195). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Johnson, L.J., & Lewman, B.S. (1990). Parents perceptions of the talents of young gifted boys and girls. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 13, 176-188.

Karnes, M.B. (Ed.). (1983). The underserved: Our young gifted children. Reston, VA: ERIC Clearinghouse on Handicapped and Gifted Children.

Kerr, B. (1991). A Handbook for counseling the gifted and talented. Alexandria, VA: American Association for Counseling and Development.

Kitano, M. (1985). Ethnography of a preschool for the gifted: What gifted young children actually do. Gifted Children Quarterly, 29, 67-71.

Kitano, M. (1989). The K-3 teacher's role in recognizing and supporting young gifted children. Young children, 44, 57-63.

Kitano, M.K. (1990). Intellectual abilities and psychological intensities in young children: Implications for the gifted. Roeper Review, 13, 5-10.

Lehman, E.B., and Erdwins, C.J. (1981). The social and emotional adjustment of young, intellectually-gifted children. Gifted Child Quarterly, 25, 134-137.

Louis, B., Feiring, C., & Lewis, M. (1992). Identifying gifted preschoolers (teacher's manual and videotape). New Brunswick, NJ: Institute for the Study of Child Development.

Louis, B., & Lewis, M. (1992). Parental beliefs about giftedness in young children and their relation to actual ability level. Gifted Child Quarterly, 36, 27-31.

Marland, S. (1972). Education of the gifted and talented. Report to the Congress of the United States by the U.S. Commissioner of Education. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Mathews, F.N., & Burns, J.M. (1987). An assessment challenge: Developing screening procedures for the preschool gifted child. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 10, 215-225.

Maxwell, E. (1995). The changing developmental needs of the gifted: Birth to maturity. In J.L.Genshaft, M. Bireley, & C.L. Hollinger, C.L. Serving gifted and talented students: A resource for school personnel. Austin, TX: Pro-ed.

McCluskey, K.W., & Walker, K.D. (1986). The doubtful girl. Kingston, ON: Ronald Frye.

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. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

Moss, E. (1990). Social interaction and metacognitive development of gifted preschoolers. Gifted Child Quarterly, 34, 16-20.

Paget, K.D. (1992). Parent involvement in early childhood services. In M. Gettinger, S.N. Elliott, & T.R. Kratochwill (Eds.), Preschool and early childhood treatment directions. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Renzulli, J.S. (1978). What makes giftedness? Reexamining a definition. Phi Delta Kappan, 60, 180-184.

Rimm, S.B. (1995). Impact of family patterns upon the development of giftedness. In J.L. Genshaft, M. Bireley, & C.L. Hollinger (Eds.), Serving gifted and talented students: A resource for school personnel. Austin, TX: Pro-ed.

Roedell, W.C. (1986). Socioemotional vulnerabilities of young children. In J.R. Whitmore (Ed.), Intellectual giftedness in young children: Recognition and development (pp. 17-33). New York: Haworth.

Roedell, W.C. (1989). Early development of gifted children. In J.L. VanTassel-Baska and P. Olszewski-Kubilius (Eds.)., Patterns of influence on gifted learners: The home, the self; and the school. New York: Teachers College.

Roedell, W.C., Jackson, N.E., & Robinson, H.B. (1980). Gifted young children. New York: Teachers College.

Rohrer, J.C. (1995). Primary teacher conceptions of giftedness: Image, evidence, and nonevidence. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 18, 269-283.

Sandel, A., McCallister, C., & Nash, W.R. (1993). Child search and screening activities for preschool gifted children. Roeper Review, 16, 98-102.

Sankar-DeLeeuw, N. (1995). Gifted preschoolers: Survey of characteristics perceived by parents and teachers. Paper presented at The 11th World Conference on Gifted and Talented Children, July 30 - August 4, Hong Kong.

Sankar-DeLeeuw, N. (1997). Gifted preschoolers: Surveys of characteristics perceived by parents and teachers (pp. 399-414). In J. Chan, R. Li, & J. Spinks (Eds.), Maximizing potential: Lengthening and strengthening our stride (Proceedings of The 11th World Conference on Gifted and Talented Children). Hong Kong: University of Hong Kong.

Silverman, L.K. (1986). Parenting young gifted children. In J.R. Whitmore (Ed.), Intellectual giftedness in young children: Recognition and development (pp. 73-87). New York: Haworth.

Smutny, J.F., & Blocksom, R.H. (1990). Education of the gifted: Programs and perspectives. Bloomington, IN: Phi Delta Kappa Educational Foundation.

Smutny, J.F., Veenker, K., & Veenker, S. (1989). Your gifted child: How to recognize and develop the special talents in your child from birth to age seven. New York: Facts on file.

Sternberg, R. (1981). A componential theory of intellectual giftedness. Gifted Child Quarterly, 25, 86-93.

Sternberg, R. J., & Davidson, J.E. (1986). Conceptions of giftedness. New York: Cambridge University.

Terman, L.M. (1925). Genetic studies of genius: Vol. 1. Mental and physical traits of a thousand gifted children. Stanford, CA: Stanford University.

Tuttle, F.B., Becker, L.A., & Sousa, J.A. (1988). Characteristics and identification of gifted and talented students (3rd ed.). Washington, DC: National Educational Association of the United States.

Webb, J. T., Meckstroth, E.A., and Tolan, S.S. (1982). Guiding the gifted child: A practical source for parents and teachers. Columbus, OH: Ohio Psychology.

Wexler-Sherman, C., Gardner, H., & Feldman, D.H. (1988). A pluralistic view of early assessment: The Project Spectrum approach. Theory into Practice, 27, 77-83.

Wolf, J.S. (1989). Consultation for parents of young gifted children. Roeper Review, 11, 219-221.

Wolfle, J. (1989). The gifted preschooler: Developmentally different, but still three or four years old. Young Children, 44, 41-48.

Wright, L. (1990). The social and nonsocial behaviors of precocious preschoolers during free play. Roeper Review, 12, 268-274.

Naomi Sankar-DeLeeuw is a Doctoral Candidate specializing in School Psychology at the University of Alberta.

Manuscript submitted June, 1997.

Revision accepted November, 1997. vestigation