Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Gifted Child Quarterly
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Web of Science (1)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Johnson, D. T.
Right arrow Articles by VanTassel-Baska, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Reviews

Science Curriculum Review: Evaluating Materials for High-Ability Learners

Dana T. Johnson

The College of William and Mary

Linda Neal Boyce

The College of William and Mary

Joyce VanTassel-Baska

The College of William and Mary

This article describes the findings of a review of existing K-8 science curriculum materials that was carried out under the National Science Curriculum Project for High-Ability Learners. Twenty-seven sets of materials were reviewed using criteria developed and refined by project staff. The purpose of the review was to ascertain whether currently available materials met the new standards in the teaching of science and the needs of gifted learners. The review findings suggest that existing basal textbooks fail to meet new science curriculum standards for all students, but particularly for high-ability learners. Modular programs and supplementary materials were found to be superior to basal textbooks on most dimensions.

Gifted Child Quarterly, Vol. 39, No. 1, 36-42 (1995)
DOI: 10.1177/001698629503900106
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Gifted Child QuarterlyHome page
J. VanTassel-Baska and S. K. Johnsen
Teacher Education Standards for the Field of Gifted Education: A Vision of Coherence for Personnel Preparation in the 21st Century
Gifted Child Quarterly, April 1, 2007; 51(2): 182 - 205.
[PDF]

Home page
 Gifted Child QuarterlyHome page
J. VanTassel-Baska and E. F. Brown
Toward Best Practice: An Analysis of the Efficacy of Curriculum Models in Gifted Education
Gifted Child Quarterly, January 1, 2007; 51(4): 342 - 358.
[Abstract] [PDF]