Creativity, Giftedness and Education

References

• Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity in context. Boulder, CO: Westview.
   Google Scholar
• Baer, J. (1998). Gender differences in the effects of extrinsic motivation on creativity. Journal of Creative Behavior, 32 (1) 18–37.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baldwin, A. Y. (1987). I’m Black but look at me, I am also gifted. Gifted Child Quarterly, 41 (4), 180–185.
   Google Scholar
• Besançon, M., Lubart, T. & Barbot, B. (in press). Creative giftedness and educational opportunities. Educational & Child Psychology, 30 (2), 79–88.
   Google Scholar
• Binet, A., & Simon, T. (1905). Méthodes nouvelles pour le diagnostic du niveau intellectuel des anormaux [New methods for diagnosing the intellectual level of abnormal persons]. L’Année Psychologique, 11, 191–244.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clifford, M. M. (1988). Failure tolerance and academic risk-taking in ten- to twelve year old students. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 58 (1), 15–27.
   Google Scholar
• Coleman, L. J. (2003). Gifted-child pedagogy : Meaningful chimera ? RoeperReview, 25 (4) 163–164.
   Google Scholar
• Collins, M. A., & Amabile, T. M. (1999). Motivation and creativity. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of Creativity (pp. 297–312). Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Conti, R., & Amabile, T. M. (1999). Motivation/Drive. In M. A. Runco & S. R. Pritzker (Eds), Encyclopedia of creativity (Vol.2, pp. 251–259). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Crespo, M. L. (2004). Construction of a creative climate measure instrument in organizations. Estudos de Psicologia, 21 (2), 91–99.
   Google Scholar
• Cropley, A. J. (1994). More ways than one: Fostering creativity. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
   Google Scholar
• Cropley, A. J. (1997).Fostering creativity in the classroom: General principles. In M. Q. Runco (Ed.). Creativity Research Handbook (pp. 83–114). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
   Google Scholar
• Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Wolfe, R. (2000). New conceptions and research approaches to creativity: Implications of a systems perspective for creativity in education. In K., Heller, F. J. Mönks, R. J. Sternberg, & R. F. Subotnik (Eds.). International handbook of giftedness and talent (pp. 81–93). Oxford: Elsevier Science.
   Google Scholar
• Dunn, R., & Dunn, K. (1993). Teaching secondary students through their individual learning styles: practical approaches for grades 7-12. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
   Google Scholar
• Dunn, R., & Griggs, S. (1995). A meta-analytic validation of the Dunn & Dunn model of learning-style preferences. Journal of Educational Research, 88 (6), 383–393.
   Google Scholar
• Fasko, D. (2002).Creativity in the schools: What’s going on? Research in the Schools, 9 (2), 15–21.
   Google Scholar
• Feist, G. (2004). The evolved fluid specificity of human creative talent. In E. L. Grigorenko & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), Creativity: from potential to realization (pp. 57–82). Washington: American Psychological Association.
   Google Scholar
• Feldman, D. H. (1982). A developmental framework for research with gifted children. In D. H. Feldman (Ed.). New Directions for Child Development: Developmental Approaches to Giftedness and Creativity (pp.31–45). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Gagné, F. (1983). Douance et talent: deux concepts à ne pas confrondre. [Gidtedness and talent : two concepts to not be confused]. Apprentissage et Socialisation, 6 (3), 146–159.
   Google Scholar
• Gagné, F. (2004). Transforming gifts into talents: the DMGT as a developmental theory, High Ability Studies, 15 (2), 119–147.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. New York: Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Georsgdottir, A., & Lubart, T. I. (2003). La flexibilité cognitive et la créativité: une approche développementale, différentielle et expérimentale. [Cognitive flexibility and creativity : a developmental, differential and experimental approach]. Psychologie Frangaise, 48 (3), 29–40.
   Google Scholar
• Getzels, J. W., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1976). The creative vision: A longitudinal study of problem finding in art. New York: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Gowan, J. C. (1971). The Relationship between creativity and giftedness. Gifted Child Quarterly, 239–243.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gregorc, A. F. (1982). An adult guide to style. Columbia, CT: Gregorc Associates, Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Guilford, J. P. (1950). Creativity. American Psychologist, 5, 444–454.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gustaffson, J. E. (1984). A unifying model for the structure of intellectual abilities, Intelligence, 8, 179–203.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Horn, J. L., & Cattel, R. B. (1966). Refinement and test of the theory of mind and crystallized intelligence. Journal of Educational Psychology, 57, 253–270.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huteau, M., & Lautrey, J. (1999). Evaluer Intelligence [Evaluate intelligence]. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
   Google Scholar
• Kanevsky, L., & Keighley, T. (2003). To produce or not to produce? Understanding boredom and the honor in underachievement. Roeper Review, 26 (1), 20–28.
   Google Scholar
• Karwowski, M. (2008). Giftedness and intuition. Gifted and Talented International, 23 (1), 115–124.
   Google Scholar
• Karwowski, M., Lebuda, I., & Wisniewska, E. (2008-2009). Creative abilities and styles as predictors of school success. Gifted and Talented International, 23 (2)- 24(1), 119–127.
   Google Scholar
• Kim, K. H. (2008). Underachievement and creativity: Are gifted underachievers highly creative? Creativity Research Journal, 20 (2), 234–242.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kulik, J. A., & Kulik, C.-L.C. (1992). Meta-analytic findings on grouping programs. Gifted Child Quarterly, 36 (2), 73–77.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Landrum, M. S., & Ward, S. B. (1993). Behavioral assessment of gifted learners. Journal of Behabioral Education, 3 (3), 211–215.
   Google Scholar
• Lautrey, J. (1980). Classe sociale, milieu familial, intelligence [Social classe, familial environnent, intelligence]. Paris: PUF.
   Google Scholar
• Lautrey, J. (2004). Les modes de scolarisation des enfants à haut potentiel et leurs effets. [Modes of schooling of gifted children and their effects]. Psychologie Frangaise, 49, 337–352.
   Google Scholar
• Lee, L.-Y., & Li, C.-Y. (2008). The moderating effects of teaching method, learning style and cross-cultural differences on the relationship between expatriate training and training effectiveness. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 19 (4), 600–619.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Loi, D., and Dillon, P. (2006). Adaptative educational environment as creative spaces. Cambridge Journal of Education, 36 (3), 363–381.
   Google Scholar
• Lubart, T. & Guignard, J-H. (2004). The generality-specificity of creativity: A multivariate approach. In E. L. Grigorenko & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), Creativity: From potential to realization (pp. 43–56). Washington: American Psychological Association.
   Google Scholar
• Lubart, T., Besançon, M. & Barbot, B. (2011). Evaluation du Potentiel Créatif (EPoC). [Evaluation of Potential Creativity]. Paris: Hogrefe France.
   Google Scholar
• Lubart, T., Mouchiroud, C., Tordjman, S., & Zenasni, F. (2003). Psychologie de la créativité. [Psychology of creativity]. Paris: Armand Colin.
   Google Scholar
• Lubart, T. I. (Dir.) (2006). Enfants exceptionnels. Précocité intellectuelle, haut potentiel et talent. [Exceptional children : precocity, high potenial and talent]. Paris: Bréal.
   Google Scholar
• Lubart, T. I., & Sternberg, R. J. (1995). An investment approach to creativity: Theory and data. In Smith, S. M., Ward, T. B., Finke, R. A. (Eds.), The creative cognition approach (pp. 271–302). Cambridge, MA, US: The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Maker, C. J., & Nielson, A. B. (1995). Curriculum development and teaching strategies for gifted learners. 2nde ed. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
   Google Scholar
• Maker, J. (1993). Creativity, intelligence, and problem solving: A definition and design for cross-cultural research and measurement related to giftedness. Gifted Education International, 9, 68–77.
   Google Scholar
• Milgram, R. M. & Hong, E. (1999). Creative out-of-school activities in intellectually gifted adolescents as predictors of their life accomplishment in young adults: A longitudinal study. Creativity Research Journal, 12, 77–87.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mönks, F. J. & Mason, E. J. (2000). Developmental psychology and giftedness: Theories and research. In F. J. Mönks, & K. A. Heller (Eds.), International handbook of giftedness and talent (2nd ed., pp. 141–267). New York: Elsevier Applied Science.
   Google Scholar
• Montessori, M. (1992). L’enfant [The child]. Paris, Desclée de Brouwer.
   Google Scholar
• Mulhern, J. D. (2003). The gifted child in the regular classroom. Roeper Review, 25 (3), 112–115.
   Google Scholar
• Newton, L., and Newton, D. (2010). Creative thinking and teaching for creativity in elementary school science. Gifted and Talented International, 25 (2), 111–124.
   Google Scholar
• Ng, A. K. (2001). Why asians are less creative than westerners. Singapore: Prentice Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Noizet, G., & Caverni, J. P. (1978). Psychologie de l’évaluation scolaire [Psychology of school evaluation]. Paris: PUF.
   Google Scholar
• Ohuche, N. M. (1987). The ideal pupil as perceived by Nigerian (Igbo) teachers and Torrance’s creative personality. Indian Journal of Applied Psychology, 24 (2), 80–86.
   Google Scholar
• Olszewski-Kubilius, P. (2000). The transition from childhood giftedness to adult creative productiveness: Psychological characteristics and social supports. Roeper Review, 23 (2), 65–71.
   Google Scholar
• Pelpel, P. (2002). Se former pour enseigner [Learning to teach]. Paris: Dunod.
   Google Scholar
• Peters, W. A.M., Grager-Loidl, H., & Supplee, P. (2000). Underachievement in gifted children and adolescent: theory and practice. In K. A. M. Heller; R. J. Sternberg; R. F. Subotnik (Edsv), International Handbook of Giftedness and Talent (pp. 609–620). Oxford: Pergamon Press.
   Google Scholar
• Peyronie, H. (1999). Célestin Freinet. Pédagogie et émancipation [Célestin Freinet : Pedagogy and emancipation]. Paris : Hachette Education.
   Google Scholar
• Reis, S., & McCoach, B. (2002). Underachievement in gifted students. In M. Neihart, S. Reis, N. Robinson, & S. Moon (Eds), The social and emotional development of gifted children (pp. 81–91). Washington DC: Prufrock Press.
   Google Scholar
• Renzulli, J. (1979). What makes giftedness: a reexamination of the definition of the gifted and talented. Ventura, CA: Ventura County Superintendant of Schools Office.
   Google Scholar
• Renzulli, J. (1986). The three ring conception of giftedness: a developmental model for creative productivity. In R. J. Sternberg & J. E. Davidson (Eds.), Conception of giftedness (pp.53–92). New-York: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Runco, M. A., & Albert, R. S. (1986). The threshold theory regarding creativity and intelligence: An empirical test with gifted and non-gifted children. Creative Child and Adult Quarterly, 11, 212–218.
   Google Scholar
• Sak, U. (2004). About creativity, giftedness and teaching the creativity gifted in the classroom. Roeper Review, 26 (4), 216–222.
   Google Scholar
• Simonton, D. K. (1984). Genius, creativity and leadership. Cambridge, MA: Havard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sternberg, R., & Lubart, T. I. (1995). Defying the crowd: Cultivating creativity in a culture of conformity. New York: Free Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sternberg, R. J. (1985). Beyond IQ: a triarchic theory of human intelligence. New York: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sternberg, R. J. (2003). Creative thinking in the classroom. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 47 (3), 325–338.
   Google Scholar
• Strom, R. D., & Strom, P. S. (2002). Changing the rules: Education for creative thinking. Journal of Creative Behavior, 36 (3), 183–200.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Torrance, E. P. (1968). A longitudinal examination of the fourth-grade slump in creativity. Gifted Child Quarterly, 13 (3), 155–158.
   Google Scholar
• Torrance, E. P. (1976). Tests de pensée créative. Paris: Editions du Centre de Psychologie Appliquée.
   Google Scholar
• Vaughn, V. L., Feldhusen, J. F., & Asher, J. W. (1991). Meta-analyses on review of research on pullout programs in gifted education. Gifted Child Quarterly, 35 (2), 92–98.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verkasalo, M., Tuomivaara, P., & Lindeman, M. (1996). 15-year-old pupils’ and their teachers’ values, and their beliefs about the values of an ideal pupil. Educational Psychology, 16 (1), 35–47.
   Google Scholar
• Wentzel, K. R. (1993). Does being good make the grade? Social behaviour and academic competence in middle school. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85 (2), 357–364.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wintkin, H. A., & Goodenough, D. R. (1981). Cognitive styles: essence and origins. New York: International Universities Press.
   Google Scholar
• Zhang, L.-F. (2008). Preferences for teaching styles matter in academic achievement: Scientific and practical implications. Educational Psychology, 28 (6), 615–625.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar