Gifted Child Quarterly

http://gcq.sagepub.com

A Study of Well-Being and School Satisfaction Among Academically Talented Students Attending a
Science High School in Korea
Suk-Un Jin and Sidney M. Moon
Gifted Child Quarterly 2006; 50; 169
DOI: 10.1177/001698620605000207
The online version of this article can be found at:
http://gcq.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/50/2/169

Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of:

National Association for Gifted Children

Additional services and information for Gifted Child Quarterly can be found at:
Email Alerts: http://gcq.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts
Subscriptions: http://gcq.sagepub.com/subscriptions
Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav
Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
Citations http://gcq.sagepub.com/cgi/content/refs/50/2/169

Downloaded from http://gcq.sagepub.com by kimbao bao on April 14, 2009

S C I E N C E

H I G H

S C H O O L

S T U D E N T S

A Study of Well-Being and School Satisfaction

Among Academically Talented Students
Attending a Science High School in Korea
Suk-Un Jin
Konkuk University, Seoul

Sidney M. Moon
Purdue University

A B S T R A C T
The purpose of this study was to examine whether
academically talented adolescents attending a residential science high school in Korea had different levels
of psychological well-being or school life satisfaction
than their high-ability peers in regular high schools.
The participating high-ability students (n = 299) were
in their second year of high school and were attending either a science high school (n = 111) or a regular
high school (n = 188) in the same province in Korea.
Both groups completed the Psychological Well Being scales (Ryff, 1989a) and a researcher-constructed
Satisfaction With School Life scale. In addition, the
science high school students responded to open-ended questions about their experiences in the science
high school. No statistically signicant differences
were found in psychological well-being, but there
were statistically signicant differences in school life
satisfaction favoring the science high school group.
The responses of the science high school sample to
the open-ended questions indicated that they appreciated the advanced curriculum and the expertise of
their teachers. They also reported satisfactory relationships with teachers and peers. Overall, the study
suggested that the residential science high school
was meeting the educational needs of these talented
Korean students, at least better than traditional high
schools. However, this study could not conrm its
primary expectation that the specialized schooling for gifted students would enhance psychological
well-being. Implications of the study for research and
practice are discussed.

characteristics and needs of gifted students. Recent leaders in gifted education have also enhanced our understanding of gifted students (Benbow & Stanley, 1983;

Gifted students are recognized as having learning and

personal characteristics that are different from nongifted
students. Much of the focus of the foundational work of
pioneers in the eld of gifted education, such as Terman
(1925) and Hollingworth (1926), was on articulating the
G I F T E D

C H I L D

Q U A R T E R L Y

P U T T I N G
T O U S E

T H E

R E S E A R C H

This study provides empirical support for the value

of special high schools in creating satisfaction with
school life among academically talented youth. The
students attending the special high school in Korea
in this study had higher satisfaction with all aspects of
school life than their counterparts in traditional high
schools. This suggests that special high schools create
a more positive climate for students with talents in the
sciences even in cultures where peers are generally
quite supportive of academic achievement.
Parents can use the study to advocate for
appropriate curricular modications, special classes,
and special schools for high school students. School
administrators can use the study to support and guide
special programming for high school students who are
talented in the sciences. Counselors can use the study
in two ways. First, they can use the results to provide
information to students who are considering accepting
invitations to participate in a special high school for
students talented in the sciences with some of the
specic benets they are likely to experience in this type
of learning environment. Second, because there were no
differences in the groups on the measure of well-being,
counselors can use the well-being instrument used in
this study to assess well-being traits such as autonomy,
personal growth, and environmental mastery among
gifted students. Students who are struggling with these
issues may benet from counseling. The study suggests
that this instrument can be used to assess the well-being
of gifted students in any educational context because
it assesses relatively stable traits that are not contextdependent.

S P R I N G

Downloaded from http://gcq.sagepub.com by kimbao bao on April 14, 2009

2 0 0 6

V O L

5 0

N O

1 6 9

S C I E N C E

H I G H

S C H O O L

S T U D E N T S

Feldhusen, VanTassel-Baska, & Seeley, 1989; Neihart,

Reis, Robinson, & Moon, 2002; Renzulli, Smith, White,
Callahan, & Hartman, 1976; Tannenbaum, 1983). Among
the unique characteristics of gifted students are the following: advanced development in language and thought
(Benbow & Minor, 1990; Jackson, 1988; Smith, 1991);
logical thinking (Davidson, 1986; Walberg et al., 1981),
advanced mathematical, musical, and artistic abilities
(Winner & Martino, 2000); motivation, persistence, and
advanced interests (Bryant, 1991; Gottfried & Gottfried,
1996; Renzulli & Reis, 1997); high internal control
(Milgram & Milgram, 1976); high excitability and sensitivity (Piechowski, 2003); and perfectionism (Whitmore,
1980). These characteristics create unique educational
needs.
Many programs have been developed to address the
academic and social/emotional needs of high-ability adolescents. There has been much research on the effectiveness of various program options for gifted and talented
students in the United States such as (a) pull-out programs
(Carter, 1986; Delcourt, Loyd, Cornell, & Goldberg,
1994; Fetterman, 1988; Kulik & Kulik, 1992; Moon,
Feldhusen, & Dillon, 1994; Renzulli & Reis, 1997;
Vaughn, Feldhusen, & Asher, 1991); (b) summer and
Saturday programs (Barnett & Durden, 1993; Benbow &
Lubinski, 1997; Fox, Brody, & Tobin, 1985; OlszewskiKubilius & Grant, 1996); (c) ability grouping in the classroom (Feldhusen, 1989; Kulik & Kulik, 1992; Rogers,
2002; Slavin, 1990); (d) special classes; and (e) acceleration
(Brody & Stanley, 1991; Feldhusen, 1989: Kulik & Kulik,
1992; Rogers, 1991; Swaitek & Benbow, 1991; Terman
& Oden, 1947); and (f) residential high schools (Clark &
Dixon, 1997; Dorsel & Wages, 1993; Eilber, 1987; Eilber
& Warshaw, 1988; Kolloff, 2003; Stanley, 1991).
Residential high schools for gifted and talented
students are designed to provide accelerated, challenging
instruction in core subject areas that match special talents
or aptitudes of the students (Feldhusen & Boggess, 2000).
Among the various types of special programs that have been
developed to meet the needs of high-ability students, residential science high schools are the most extreme option
with regard to the intensity of the program. These high
schools can be effective and efcient programs because
they serve a homogeneous group of high-ability students
and address both the academic and social life of the students. It is generally assumed that these special programs
and schools will meet the affective needs, as well as the
educational needs of gifted students, and that, as a result,
they will be helpful in enhancing their lives. This study
tried to investigate whether a residential science high
school in Korea was meeting the affective and educational
1 7 0

G I F T E D

C H I L D

Q U A R T E R L Y

S P R I N G

needs of participating students by comparing their level

of psychological well-being and school life satisfaction to
a comparable group in traditional high schools.
The perspective of this study assumes that better
theories, better programs, and better practices will bring
about better lives for high-ability students. Being academically successful may provide students with many opportunities for career success. However, more meaningful
success is achieved when high-ability students make
good choices and function well in all areas of life (Moon,
2003; Nail & Evans, 1997). Fulllment of potential
involves autonomous self-determination (Ryan & Deci,
2000). One outcome of special programs based on this
perspective is the psychological well-being of students.
Another is their satisfaction with school life. No previous research has compared the well-being and satisfaction with school life of students of high ability attending
residential science high schools with the same qualities
of high-ability students attending ordinary high schools
(Winner, 1997).
The purpose of this study was to investigate the
well-being and school satisfaction of high-ability students
attending a residential science high school for gifted students in Korea and compare it with that of equally talented students attending typical high schools in the same
province. In addition, the study compared student perceptions of the extent to which each type of high school
was offering educational experiences appropriate for
gifted students.

Review of the Literature

Educational Needs of Gifted Students

Feldhusen (1989) and Gallagher (1986) synthesized
the various needs of gifted students into three comprehensive educational needs. First, gifted and talented students
need accelerated, challenging instruction in core subject
areas that match their special talents or aptitudes. Second,
gifted and talented students need opportunities to work
with other gifted and talented students. Third, gifted and
talented students need highly competent teachers who
both understand the nature and needs of these students
and are deeply knowledgeable in the content they teach.
Challenging Instruction. Gifted and talented students
often complain about the boredom that they experience
in regular classrooms due to lack of an appropriate level
of challenge (Csikszentmihalyi, Rathunde, & Whalen,
1993; Feldhusen & Kroll, 1991; Gross, 1993; Jin &
Feldhusen, 2000). These students may be forced to spend
2 0 0 6

V O L

5 0

N O

Downloaded from http://gcq.sagepub.com by kimbao bao on April 14, 2009

S C I E N C E

a lot of time being taught things they already know, doing

repetitive drill sheets and activities, and receiving instruction on new material at a pace that is inappropriate, given
their level of ability. Residential science high schools can,
more easily than regular schools, provide enriched curriculum, upgrading the level and pace of instruction to
t abilities, achievement levels, and interests of gifted and
talented students.
Opportunities to Work With Peers. In addition, gifted
and talented students need opportunities to work with
other gifted and talented students. Peer pressure inhibits
excitement about academics in many regular schools.
Gifted students often must hide or suppress their special
interests or their enthusiasm for academic topics in order
to avoid ridicule (Delisle, 1984). Many gifted students
worry about being viewed as outcasts because of their
scholarly or bookish natures. They often are ostracized as
being different and weird and are labeled as nerds and
geeks (Silverman, 1993). Through interaction with
other gifted and talented students in residential science
high schools, they can nd others who are like themselves
and conrm the legitimacy of their personal identity.
They mutually reinforce their enthusiasm for academic
interests and activities (Feldhusen, 1989).
Competent Teachers. Finally, gifted and talented students
need highly competent teachers who both understand the
nature and needs of these students and are deeply knowledgeable in the content they teach. Teachers in regular high
schools often make little accommodation to the needs of
gifted and talented students, and many high school teachers have little or no special training in how to teach such
exceptional students (Westberg, Archambault, Dobyns, &
Salvin, 1993). Residential science high schools usually have
higher faculty qualications than do normal high schools.
Most teachers are assigned to these special schools because
they previously displayed excellence in educating students
in a certain subject area and/or they were specially trained
in educating gifted and talented students (Dorsel & Wages,
1993; Lewis, 1993; Stanley, 1991).
This study investigated a residential science high
school that was designed by the Korean government to
meet these three educational needs in high school students
who are gifted in the sciences. The admission standards
and curriculum of the school are described in detail in the
methods section.

Affective Needs of Gifted Students

Affective Issues in Gifted Education. A recent review of
the literature concluded that there is no evidence that
gifted youth as a group have any inherent social/emoG I F T E D

C H I L D

H I G H

S C H O O L

S T U D E N T S

tional vulnerabilities (Neihart et al., 2002). In fact, the

opposite may be true as there is some evidence to support the hypothesis that most gifted young people possess
assets such as above-average intellectual ability, problemsolving skills, and personal talents that promote resilience
and well-being (Bland, Sowa, & Callahan, 1994; Kitano
& Lewis, 2005; Neihart, 2002). At the same time, there
is evidence that inappropriate environments can create
affective stress and adjustment problems for gifted and talented youth (Colangelo, Assouline, & Gross, 2004; Gross,
1993; Neihart et al.). For example, like other young people, gifted youth can have adjustment difculties when
their families are dysfunctional (Moon & Thomas, 2003;
Sowa & May, 1997; Wendorf & Frey, 1985).
The most common environmental source of social/
emotional problems in gifted youth appears to be placement in a school environment that provides insufcient
academic challenge and inappropriate peers (Robinson,
Reis, Neihart, & Moon, 2002). Inappropriate school
environments can create considerable social/emotional
stress for gifted youth (Colangelo et al., 2004; Gross,
1994). The negative affective impact of inadequate educational environments appears to be particularly strong
for highly gifted youth, perhaps because they are so different from their chronological peers (Gross, 1993; Gross,
2002). For example, Gross (2002) found that exceptionally gifted youth displayed conceptions of friendship that
were 5 to 6 years in advance of their chronological peers.
These large differences in friendship conceptions make
it very difcult for highly gifted students placed in regular classrooms to form meaningful friendships with their
classmates, especially before the age of 10.
Affective Outcomes of Gifted Programs. If the lack of
appropriate programming creates social/emotional difculties, can appropriate academic interventions reduce
social/emotional distress and promote social/emotional
adjustment? A few studies have examined this question with somewhat equivocal ndings. For example, a
meta-analysis of pull-out programs found that some of
these programs were associated with increases in selfconcept in gifted children, while others were associated
with decreases in self-concept (Vaughn et al., 1991). On
average, pull-out programs were found to have no effect
on self-concept. Similarly, a review of the literature on
the effects of a wide variety of accelerative options found
negligible effects on the self-concepts of gifted students
(Rogers, 2002). As these examples illustrate, most of the
research on the affective outcomes of gifted programs has
used self-concept as the outcome variable. This is limiting because affective development is much broader than
self-concept. In order to get a true picture of the effects

Q U A R T E R L Y

S P R I N G

Downloaded from http://gcq.sagepub.com by kimbao bao on April 14, 2009

2 0 0 6

V O L

5 0

N O

1 7 1

S C I E N C E

H I G H

S C H O O L

S T U D E N T S

of gifted programs on affective outcomes, more comprehensive and complex measures of those outcomes, such
as multifaceted well-being scales and measures of school
satisfaction, must be utilized.
Effects of Residential High Schools on Affective Outcomes.
There has been very little research conducted on the affective outcomes of residential high schools. However, a recent
ethnographic study of a residential high school for gifted
students in the United States suggested that such schools
may have unique social systems characterized by openness,
uidity, acceptance, business, pressure, and shock and
amazement (Coleman, 2001). Taken together, these characteristics suggest mixed affective effects with some effects
being positive (being in a more open, uid, and accepting environment) while others are more negative (hectic
schedules, academic pressure, and adjustment to the rules
and limitations of residential life). This study lls a gap in
the literature by examining the effects of participation
in a residential high school on several affective outcomes
including autonomy, personal growth, positive relationships
with others, self-acceptance, and school satisfaction.

Well-Being and Satisfaction With School Life

Most of the research on affective needs of gifted students has been conducted from a decit or negative psychology theoretical framework. For example, quite a few
studies have examined whether gifted students experience more affective problems than other students (Keiley,
1997). Researchers have also examined within-group differences in populations of gifted students on issues such
as peer relationships (Cornell, 1990; Cross, Coleman,
& Terhaar-Yonkers, 1991) or perfectionism (Dixon,
Lapsley, & Hanchon, 2004; Speirs Neumeister, 2004). In
at least one instance, a study evaluating the effects of different types of gifted programs on behavioral adjustment
had to be halted because parents and teachers objected to
the negative focus in the instrument (The Child Behavior
Checklist; Delcourt et al., 1994). This suggests a need for
gifted education to take a more positive, talent-focused
approach to the evaluation of affective outcomes of gifted
programs (Moon, 2003). This study was conducted from
a positive psychology perspective, utilizing a measure of
positive well-being that had not been used in any prior
research on the effects of gifted programs on affective
outcomes.
Well-Being. The available body of research regarding
psychological well-being ranges across many other disciplines, from humanities and social sciences (e.g., philosophy, sociology, and psychology) to natural sciences
(e.g., neurology and genetics). Recently, social psycholo1 7 2

G I F T E D

C H I L D

Q U A R T E R L Y

S P R I N G

gists have developed a focus on well-being, resulting in a

surge of published studies (Argyle, Martin, & Crossland,
1989; Diener, 1984, 2000; Myers, 2000; Veenhoven,
1984). These studies have been variously labeled and
classied as balanced affect (Bradburn, 1969), subjective
well-being (Diener, 1984, 2000; Myers, 2000), quality
of life (Flanagan, 1979), mental health (Jahoda, 1958),
healthy personality (Veenhoven, 1984), optimal experience (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990), psychological well-being
(Ryff, 1989a, 1995), and so on.
There are three areas of literature that provide theoretical guidance in understanding the meaning of psychological well-being. Developmental psychology offers
numerous depictions of wellness, conceived as progressions of continued growth across the life course. These
perspectives include Eriksons (1959) model of the stages
of psychosocial development and Buhlers (1935) formulation of basic life tendencies promote work fulllment.
Clinical psychology also offers multiple formulations of
well-being, such as Maslows (1968) conception of selfactualization, Rogers (1961) view of the fully functioning person, Jungs (1933) formulation of individuation,
and Allports (1961) conception of maturity. The mental
health literature, although guided largely by absenceof-illness denitions of well-being, includes signicant
exceptions, such as Jahodas (1958) formulation of positive criteria of mental health.
Ryff (1989a) argued that the preceding perspectives can be integrated into a more parsimonious summary. That is, when one reviews the characteristics of
well-being described in these various formulations, it
becomes apparent that many of the theorists have written
about similar features of positive psychological functioning. The convergence of these theories of positive functioning served as the theoretical foundation for Ryffs
multidimensional model of well-being. Ryffs model of
well-being was selected for this research because of its
(a) elegance, (b) operationalization in a published instrument, and (c) relevance to the optimization of potential.
The Psychological Well-Being scales (Ryff, Lee, & Na,
1993) are based on Ryffs model and measure six aspects
of well-being (autonomy, environmental mastery, personal growth, positive relationships with others, purpose
of life, and self-acceptance), all of which are predicted by
personal talent theory to enhance the ability of talented
youth to realize their potential (Moon, 2003). These scales
were used in this research to compare the well-being of
students enrolled in a residential science high school with
students in a general education high school.
Satisfaction With School Life. One way to evaluate an
educational intervention is to investigate student percep2 0 0 6

V O L

5 0

N O

Downloaded from http://gcq.sagepub.com by kimbao bao on April 14, 2009

S C I E N C E

tions of its value and effectiveness. For example, university courses are often evaluated by questionnaires that
assess student satisfaction with the curriculum, professor,
and assignments. Similarly, studies of gifted and talented
programs often use student satisfaction questionnaires as
an outcome measure (Moon et al., 1994; Dorsel & Wages,
1993). Satisfaction questionnaires are especially appropriate for research designed to investigate student perceptions of the quality of their experience. In this study, the
perceptions of high-ability students about the degree to
which their high school was meeting their educational
needs were assessed and compared.
In summary, this study investigated selected affective
outcomes of gifted and talented programming from a
positive psychology perspective. The focus of the study
was on whether gifted education can enhance the wellbeing and school satisfaction of gifted students, rather
than on whether it can prevent the psychological harm
that so often occurs when gifted students are placed in
inappropriate educational environments.

Methods
This study used the causal-comparative method.
Responses of students to questionnaires in one type of
high school were compared to the responses of students in
another type of high school. Causal-comparative methods
are frequently used in educational research to examine
the possible effects of variables that are difcult or
impossible to manipulate experimentally (Borg, Gall, &
Gall, 1993).

Site and Context: Residential Science High Schools

in Korea
History. In the 1970s, some Korean educators realized
that there should be special services to meet the needs
of high-ability students. However, their efforts to serve
high-ability students encountered such obstacles as legislative restrictions and an unfriendly public milieu. In the
end, their efforts did accomplish the development of science high schools for high-ability students in the 1980s.
Special schools for high-ability students were formed
because educating highly talented students in science and
technology appealed to politicians who regarded students
as national resources and wanted to train them so that
they would devote themselves to achieving national
competitiveness in the global and industrial world.
Since the rst science high school was established in
1983, the number of these schools has expanded to 16,
G I F T E D

C H I L D

H I G H

S C H O O L

S T U D E N T S

one in each province. For secondary students in Korea,

these science high schools are currently the only alternative to general secondary education, which is characterized by an extremely uniform curriculum and the
acquisition of a large knowledge base through memorization. By establishing one science high school in each
province, the government intended to house and educate
students talented in mathematics and science from all parts
of Korea. These residential science high schools of Korea
have now served high-ability students for more than two
decades.
Curriculum. Students admitted to a science high school
enjoy a very small teacher/student ratio of 1:8, sometimes
as low as 1:4 (Wu, Cho, & Munandar, 2000). This is quite
different from the crowded classrooms in most Korean
high schools, which house about 40 students in each class
and have a higher teacher/student ratio of 1:15. Students
in science high schools also have the advantage of instruction that emphasizes laboratory and inquiry methods.
The curriculum is composed of general coursework,
independent study, and special activities. General courses
include the Korean language, social studies, foreign
languages, arts, physical education, and science-related
courses (mathematics, physics, chemistry, biology, earth
science, information science, and recent developments in
science). Mandatory courses help students gain general
knowledge and elective courses deal with more specialized
content. Independent research allows students to choose a
topic and conduct in-depth research using their own initiative. It is usually conducted in a small group of three
or four students under supervising teachers and university
mentors. Special activities include various in-school clubs,
self-development activities, and volunteering.
A unique aspect of science high schools in Korea
is their use of acceleration in the form of early graduation. Highly qualied students can complete their high
school curriculum in 2 years and be admitted to the Korea
Academic Institute of Science and Technology (KAIST),
a college for the scientically gifted. This option can alleviate the pressure of the college entrance examination
and can enable gifted students to spend more time developing their potential instead of preparing for the college
entrance examination.
Admission. The selection criteria for admission to the
science high school were as follows: (a) academic achievement in the top 13% of their middle school classes,
(b) good performance on entrance examinations assessing achievement in mathematics, science, Korean, and
English, (c) health examination and interview, and (d)
awards or honors in academic competitions such as science or math Olympiad.

Q U A R T E R L Y

S P R I N G

Downloaded from http://gcq.sagepub.com by kimbao bao on April 14, 2009

2 0 0 6

V O L

5 0

N O

1 7 3

S C I E N C E

H I G H

S C H O O L

S T U D E N T S

Subjects
Determination of Sample Size. Many studies, using multivariate analyses, have obtained nonsignicant results due
to small sample sizes (i.e., Herron, 1999; Lipkin, 1999).
Through a priori power analysis, the required number
of subjects can be estimated in given conditions, that is,
a specic signicance level, effect size, and power level.
However, we were not able to estimate the effect size
for this study a priori because we did not have any previous studies using the same kind of subjects and variables.
When there is little information for estimating effect size,
the safest approach is to assume a small effect size because
most social science research produces small to medium
effect sizes (Grimm & Yarnold, 1995; Keppel, 1991). For
this study we assumed (a) alpha = .05, (b) power > .70,
and (c) a small effect, making the required sample size per
group (in a two-group multivariate analysis of variance)
about 100.
Recruiting the Participants. Comparability between science high school and regular high school samples was the
most important consideration in selecting students from
the regular high schools. Individual students from the
regular high schools were selected by the qualication
standards for entry into the science high school effective
when the current second-year students entered the science high school. In other words, the two samples were
equal in academic achievement as measured by GPAs
for the last 2 years of junior high school and award
experiences in academic competitions. Additionally,
nationally standardized high school entrance exam scores
were also compared between these two groups, even
though these were not considered when students were
selected for the science high school because science high
schools administer their own customized entrance exams
to applicants. For both groups, only second-year students
(juniors) were sampled. Seniors were excluded because
approximately one third of the science high school students choose the early graduation option and leave for
college after their second year. In addition, sampling in
the general high schools was limited to students in classes
of the science and technology group. Unlike science high schools, which enroll only students who will
pursue careers in sciences, engineering, and technology,
general high schools enroll students regardless of their
future career interests. However, students in general high
schools do select either the science and technology group
or the liberal arts and social science group by the end of
their rst year. Thus, a comparison group from general
high schools was sampled from second-year students of
1 7 4

G I F T E D

C H I L D

Q U A R T E R L Y

S P R I N G

the science and technology group so that the comparison group would be as similar as possible to the students
enrolled in the science high school.
Through the above sampling procedures, 111 students
(93 boys and 18 girls) from one science high school and 188
students (122 boys and 66 girls) from general high schools
in the same province were selected for this study. Because
females are underrepresented in science high schools in
Korea, the small proportion of females in the study was an
accurate reection of the science high school population.
Because of the small size of the female sample from the
science high school, gender was not included as an independent variable in the multivariate analysis of participant
well-being. Instead, group differences between students
at the two school settings were examined for males only.
However, gender was included as an independent variable in the two-way ANOVA comparing school satisfaction because the number of females in the sample was still
small, but allowable for this univariate analysis.

Instruments
Three main instruments were used in this study.
First, the Psychological Well-Being scales (Ryff, 1989a)
were administered to measure students psychological
well-being. Second, a Satisfaction With School Life scale
designed by the investigator was administered to assess
students satisfaction level with their school life. Third,
open-ended questions were used to elicit science high
school students perceptions of their school experiences.
Psychological Well-Being Scales. Respondents completed
a self-report inventory designed to measure six aspects of
psychological well-being. The inventory was based on
a multidimensional model of psychological well-being
(PWB) that was derived from theoretical discussions of
positive human functioning and normal human development (Ryff, 1989a, 1989b, 1995). The PWB scales assess
individuals appraisals of themselves and their lives across
six conceptually distinct realms of psychological functioning. Each dimension was operationalized with a 14-item
scale divided between positively and negatively phrased
items (see Table 1).
The validity and reliability of the measures have been
documented with extensive psychometric data across
multiple studies (Ryff, 1989a, 1989b, 1992, 1995). For
example, Ryff (1989b) reported that the scales demonstrate
high internal consistency reliability (coefcient alphas
range from 0.86 to 0.93) and temporal reliability (testretest coefcients range from 0.81 to 0.88). The scales
have also been found to correlate modestly and positively
with existing measures of positive functioning (e.g., life
2 0 0 6

V O L

5 0

N O

Downloaded from http://gcq.sagepub.com by kimbao bao on April 14, 2009

S C I E N C E

T a b l e

H I G H

S C H O O L

S T U D E N T S

Sample Items of the Psychological Well-Being Scale

Subscale

Item

Recode

Description

I am not afraid to voice my opinions, even when they are in opposition

to the opinions of most people.

19

I tend to worry about what other people think of me.

Environmental
Mastery

In general, I feel I am in charge of the situation in which I live.

The demands of everyday life often get me down.

Personal Growth

27

I think it is important to have new experiences that challenge how

you think about yourself and the world.

75

I gave up trying to make big improvements or changes in my life.

10

Maintaining close relationships has been difcult and frustrating for

me.

52

People would describe me as a giving person, willing to share my time

with others.

11

I live life one day at a time and dont really think about the future.

61

Some people wander aimlessly through life, but I am not one of

them.

30

I like most aspects of my personality.

42

In many ways, I feel disappointed about my achievements.

Autonomy

Positive Relations
With Others

Purpose in Life

Self-Acceptance

Note. All items were responded to using a 6-point Likert scale: 1 = strongly disagree, 2 = moderately disagree, 3 = slightly disagree, 4 = slightly agree, 5 = moderately agree,
and 6 = strongly agree. All items are recoded as follows: + : Recode as answered number; : Recode as reversed number 16, 25, 34, 43, 52, 61.

satisfaction, affect balance, self-esteem, internal control)

and negatively with measures of negative functioning
(e.g., depression, powerful others, external control),
thereby demonstrating convergent and discriminant
validity. Multiple sources of evidence have demonstrated
that the six dimensions of PWB are distinct constructs
(Ryff, 1989a, 1992; Ryff et al., 1993). Conrmatory factor
analyses with data from a nationally representative sample
supported the multidimensional structure having six
factors with a single latent construct called psychological
well-being (Ryff, 1995).
The Korean version of the Psychological Well-Being
scales was developed in a prior study (Ryff et al., 1993).
Five bilingual speakers of Korean and English prepared
the Korean version of the questions. Pilot interviews were
also conducted with Korean respondents to evaluate the
translated items. When exactly similar expressions could
not be found in Korean, new expressions were selected to
convey similar meanings.
Satisfaction With School Life. The Satisfaction With
School Life questionnaire was designed by the investigators
to assess the students level of satisfaction with their
school life. Aspects of school life that were assessed
G I F T E D

C H I L D

included curriculum, teachers, and peer relationships,

that is, the very educational needs that were noted in
an earlier section of this article: challenging curriculum,
intellectual peers, and trained teachers (Feldhusen, 1989;
Gallagher, 1986). Six items assessed students satisfaction
with curriculum and teachers, three items assessed their
satisfaction with peer relations, and three items assessed
their satisfaction with other various aspects of the school.
Students expressed their level of satisfaction by indicating
the extent to which they agreed or disagreed with each
statement (e.g., My teachers have deep knowledge of
their subject) using a 6-point format: strongly disagree (1),
moderately disagree (2), slightly disagree (3), slightly agree (4),
moderately agree (5), and strongly agree (6).
Open-Ended Questions. Additional open-ended
questions were used with science high school students
to elicit further information about their feelings and
opinions about their experiences in a science high school.
Open-ended questions were not prepared to compare the
student groups from two different school settings, but
rather to gather practical information from science high
school students for improving their schools. However,
the information that was gathered was summarized

Q U A R T E R L Y

S P R I N G

Downloaded from http://gcq.sagepub.com by kimbao bao on April 14, 2009

2 0 0 6

V O L

5 0

N O

1 7 5

S C I E N C E

H I G H

S C H O O L

S T U D E N T S

T a b l e

and introduced in this paper to give readers a better

understanding about whats going on inside this school.

Internal Consistency (Alpha) Coefcients

of Psychological Well-Being

Data Analysis
The reliability of the scales was assessed via Cronbachs
alpha coefcients. Unlike American versions of PWB, the
psychometrical properties of the Korean version needed
to be carefully assessed because the appropriateness of
scales to the Korean cultural setting and to adolescents
had not been investigated prior to this study.
The primary hypothesisthat there would be a
signicant difference in levels of psychological wellbeing between science high school students and highability general high school studentswas tested using
a two-group MANOVA. Before proceeding with the
MANOVA, three assumptions were assessed: (a) multivariate normality, (b) homogeneity of the covariance
matrices, and (c) independence of observations. It was
found that only the assumption of homogeneity of the
covariance matrices was not met. However, this violation
is supposed to produce a conservative multivariate test.
Therefore, further analyses could be conducted without
being concerned about ination of the level, although
the violation did raise concern about increased likelihood
of Type II error.
Group responses to the Satisfaction With School Life
scale were compared via a 2 2 ANOVA. The independent variables were school type (science school or general
school) and gender (male or female), and the dependent
variable was the total score on the Satisfaction With School
Life scale. Individual items were analyzed descriptively,
that is, means and standard deviations were computed.
Students responses to the Satisfaction With School Life
scale provided information about students direct appraisals of their schooling. The responses of students attending
the science high school to the open-ended questionnaire
were summarized and were used to help interpret the
results of the core analyses and to describe student perceptions of the science high school experience.

Science General Total

n = 111 n = 186 N = 297
No. of
Items

Autonomy

14

.63

.81

.76

Environmental mastery

14

.75

.77

.78

Personal growth

14

.76

.81

.78

Positive relationship
with others

14

.85

.90

.88

Purpose of life

14

.81

.86

.85

Self-acceptance

14

.84

.89

.87

Total

84

.94

.95

.95

Note. = Cronbachs alpha coefcients.

in the science high school sample, all alpha coefcients

were above .75. At the level of the total scale, the alpha
coefcient was .95. These reliability coefcients, although
lower than those reported by Ryff (1989a, 1989b, 1992,
1995) when the instrument was used with adults in the
United States, suggest that the Korean version of the
Psychological Well-Being scales used in this research
was a reliable measure of the well-being of high-ability
adolescents.
The alpha coefcients of the 13-item scale, Satisfaction
With School Life, were .85 for the science high school
sample, .85 for the general high school sample, and .90 for
the total sample. These very high reliability coefcients
suggest that Satisfaction With School Life scale was a reliable measure.

Group Comparisons of Psychological Well-Being

Results

Reliability of the Instruments

On the subdimensions of psychological well-being,
reliability coefcients ranged from .63 to .85 in the science high school sample, from .77 to .90 in the general
high school sample, and from .76 to .88 in the total sample
(see Table 2). Excluding the .63 reliability for autonomy
1 7 6

G I F T E D

C H I L D

Q U A R T E R L Y

S P R I N G

The Psychological Well-Being scales were used to

assess which group of students was offered better educational experiences, with the assumption that students
schooling experiences would affect their psychological
well-being. It was assumed that the level of psychological
well-being in the science high school sample would be
higher than in the general high school sample. However,
the MANOVA results indicated no statistically signicant difference between groups (Hotellings T2 = .031, p
2 0 0 6

V O L

5 0

N O

Downloaded from http://gcq.sagepub.com by kimbao bao on April 14, 2009

S C I E N C E

T a b l e

H I G H

S C H O O L

S T U D E N T S

Subscale Scores in Psychological Well-Being

Science
Male
(n = 92)

General
Female
(n = 18)

Male
(n = 120)

Female
(n = 18)

SD

SD

SD

SD

Autonomy

3.60

0.47

3.59

0.45

3.55

0.64

3.70

0.64

Environmental mastery

3.92

0.58

3.96

0.63

3.93

0.73

3.92

0.55

Personal growth

4.23

0.57

4.41

0.46

3.93

0.73

3.92

0.55

Positive relationship with others

3.96

0.74

3.79

0.99

4.05

0.77

4.08

0.84

Purpose of life

4.10

0.64

4.31

0.62

4.14

0.75

4.33

0.65

Self-acceptance

3.62

0.67

3.71

0.89

3.54

0.76

3.73

0.74

Note. All psychological well-being subscales were assessed on a 6-point scale. The higher value indicates the higher level of psychological well-being.

= .384). As a result, no further univariate analyses on each

dimension of psychological well-being were pursued.
Mean responses of the high-ability students in this study
on the subcomponents of the Psychological Well-Being
scales are summarized by group and gender in Table 3.

Group Comparisons on Satisfaction

With School Life
The Satisfaction With School Life scale was used to
assess how students perceived their school life. Whereas
the Psychological Well-Being scales provided more indirect, contextual, and affective information about the
impact of students school experiences, the Satisfaction
With School Life scale provided more direct, contextualized, and cognitive information.
To examine group differences in Satisfaction With
School Life, a two-way analysis of variance was conducted for the total score of the Satisfaction With School
Life scale. The 2 2 ANOVA results indicated that the
school effect, F (1, 292) = 119.08, p < .01, was statistically signicant; but the gender effect, F (1, 292) = .02,
p = .89, and the interaction between school and gender,
F (1, 292) = .06, p = .81, were not statistically signicant.
The size of the main effect for school type was quite large
(eta2 = .29) and, as a result, the observed power level was
close to 1. Considering the sufcient sample size for the
2 2 ANOVA design, on the other hand, the low level
of power for any gender-related effects seemed to be due
to the close-to-zero effect sizes (eta2 < .001 for both the
gender effect and the gender-school interaction).
G I F T E D

C H I L D

In order to understand how consistent the differences

between samples were throughout the 13 items on the
Satisfaction With School Life scale, means and standard
deviations were computed (see Table 4) and group proles were compared in a line graph (see Figure 1). Items
with especially large differences included Opportunities
for Extracurricular Activities (Item 9), Exploration of
Individual Interests (Item 10), Facilities for Experiments
(Item 11), and Career Guidance (Item 12). The line graph
shows that the science high school sample had higher
mean scores on all 13 items, including Socioemotional
Needs (Item 4). This suggests that the science high school
was more effective than the regular high schools in meeting both the academic and social/emotional needs of
gifted students. Some problems in the curricula of general high schools in Korea for high-ability students can be
summarized based on these differences: teaching methods are not sufciently varied, the schools do not provide
many opportunities for exploration of individual interests
or involvement in extracurricular activities, and the facilities and resources of these schools are inadequate to support the learning of gifted students. As predicted by the
literature, the result is lower satisfaction with schooling
among gifted students and failure to meet the socioemotional needs of gifted students.
It is also notable that there was not much difference
between the groups with respect to Close Relationship
With Peers (Item 7). The literature suggests that many
high-ability students in high schools in the United States
have difculty nding intellectual peers when placed in
regular classrooms, and some of them even experience

Q U A R T E R L Y

S P R I N G

Downloaded from http://gcq.sagepub.com by kimbao bao on April 14, 2009

2 0 0 6

V O L

5 0

N O

1 7 7

S C I E N C E

H I G H

S C H O O L

S T U D E N T S

T a b l e

Means and Standard Deviations of Satisfaction With School Life Scale

Science
Male
(n = 93)
No

Item Description

General
Female
(n = 18)

SD

Male
(n = 120)

SD

Female
(n = 65)

SD

SD

Teachers knowledge

4.36

1.50

4.95

.91

3.92

1.23

3.75

1.39

Teaching methods

4.17

1.11

4.52

.71

3.21

1.14

3.22

1.18

Level of curriculum

4.44

1.12

4.57

1.02

3.16

1.25

3.42

1.10

Socioemotional needs

4.26

1.40

4.10

1.63

2.87

1.26

3.07

1.13

Relationship with teachers

4.80

1.09

4.52

1.68

3.61

1.46

3.45

1.40

Intellectual peers

4.19

1.47

4.42

1.15

3.74

1.12

3.75

1.25

Relationship with peers

4.63

1.19

3.95

1.64

4.29

1.27

4.46

1.04

Cooperative learning

4.34

1.18

4.33

1.19

3.57

1.24

3.64

1.17

Extracurricular activities

4.66

1.35

4.24

.95

2.04

1.40

2.84

1.58

10

Individual exploration

3.77

1.43

3.67

1.52

1.94

1.21

1.82

1.12

11

Facilities and resources

4.90

1.08

5.29

.67

2.48

1.29

2.03

1.00

12

Career guidance

3.99

1.36

4.14

1.15

2.44

1.26

2.32

1.15

13

Personality development

3.96

1.42

3.62

1.40

2.58

1.39

2.66

1.27

56.48

10.08

56.33

9.86

39.86

10.21

40.43

9.17

Total

alienation from their classmates because of the highly able

students devotion to strong academic interests (Austin
& Draper, 1981; Feldhusen & Dai, 1997; Gross, 1998).
However, the results of this study imply that most highability students in Korea can maintain and enjoy good
relationships with their chronological peers, regardless
of their educational setting. This might be due to the
strong support for academic achievement in Korean peer
culture.

Responses to Open-Ended Questions

The main purpose of this study was to investigate how
well science high schools are serving high-ability students
by assessing their psychological well-being and satisfaction with school life. In order to collect more information
about how students felt about their experiences in science
high schools, an additional open-ended questionnaire
was administered to the science high school sample. The
responses to the question What are you most satised
with at your science high school? are presented in Table
1 7 8

G I F T E D

C H I L D

Q U A R T E R L Y

S P R I N G

5. There were not many students who reported complaints. About half of the students responded that they
were most satised with their good relationships with
others (peers, teachers, and seniors/juniors) (47.1%). It
was expected that students would be able to enjoy better relationships with their peers due to their similar academic interests. Almost a third said they appreciated the
freedom in school life that they enjoyed at the residential
school. The high number of spontaneous responses in
these categories provide further support for positive affective impact of the special school.
To the nal question, Do you think you made the
right decision to enter a science high school?, 93.1% of
students reported that they felt they had made the right
decision. Only 7 students out of 102 felt they had made
the wrong decision. Among those 7 students, 6 students
mentioned disadvantages in college entrance as the reason for their No response, and the other student mentioned relational difculties with peers. The disadvantage
in college entrance refers to the fact that colleges in Korea
are legally obligated to use academic rank within each
2 0 0 6

V O L

5 0

N O

Downloaded from http://gcq.sagepub.com by kimbao bao on April 14, 2009

S C I E N C E

H I G H

S C H O O L

S T U D E N T S

Figure 1. Group proles in satisfaction with school life

T a b l e

Responses to the Open-Ended Question What Are You Most Satised With Among Your Expectations
of the Science High School?
Category

na

Good relationships with peers, teachers, and older/younger students

48

47.1

Freedom in school life

31

30.4

Hands-on activities (e.g., experiments)

30

29.4

Advanced curriculum

26

25.5

Facilities (experimental tools, computers)

24

23.5

Residential system

15

14.7

Extracurricular activities (e.g., club activities)

10

9.8

Knowledgeable teachers

8.8

True peers (on an academically similar level)

7.8

Good food in the school cafeteria

6.9

Natural environment (quiet neighborhood, clean air)

6.9

Note. The number of valid cases (N) = 102.

a
n = number of students making a response in this category. Respondents were allowed to make multiple responses to each question. Therefore, the sum of ns may exceed
N.

school, without considering particular school contexts,

in admission decisions. The government and colleges are
attempting to address this issue.

Discussion
The main purpose of this study was to examine
whether adolescents in science high schools have a higher
level of psychological well-being and school-life satisfaction than their counterparts in general high schools. The
researchers administered the Psychological Well-Being
G I F T E D

C H I L D

scales and Satisfaction With School Life scale to adolescents from one science high school and several general
high schools. When high-ability adolescents from the
two different school types were compared, no statistically signicant difference in psychological well-being
was detected. However, adolescents from the science
high school showed higher levels of satisfaction with their
school life than ones from the general high schools.
The psychological well-being of high-ability students was investigated, based on three assumptions: (a)
Science high schools meet the academic and emotional
needs of high-ability students better than general high

Q U A R T E R L Y

S P R I N G

Downloaded from http://gcq.sagepub.com by kimbao bao on April 14, 2009

2 0 0 6

V O L

5 0

N O

1 7 9

S C I E N C E

H I G H

S C H O O L

S T U D E N T S

schools; (b) the more the academic and emotional needs

of adolescents are met, the higher the level of well-being
and satisfaction they will experience; and (c) the wellbeing of high-ability adolescents can be measured by
the Psychological Well-Being scales developed by Ryff
(1989a). Considering the results from the Satisfaction
With School Life scale and the open-ended questions to
the science high school sample, the rst assumption seems
to be tenable. The results of the Satisfaction With School
Life scale indicated that the science high school students
have considerably higher levels of satisfaction with their
school life. The science high school samples responses to
the open-ended questions also showed that the students
enjoyed the advanced curriculum, competent teachers,
and satisfactory relationships with teachers and peers, all
of which they did not experience during their middle
school years.
However, nonsignicant differences in psychological
well-being cast suspicion on the other two assumptions.
In fact, there have been debates about whether psychological well-being is a stable personal trait or a variable
state (Stones, Hadjistavropoulos, Tuukko, & Kozma,
1995; Veenhoven, 1994). For example, a study on several
thousand middle-aged twins (Lykken & Tellegen, 1996)
showed that from 44% to 52% of the variance in psychological well-being is associated with genetic variation,
while neither socioeconomic status, educational attainment, family income, marital status, nor an indicant of
religious commitment account for more than about 3%
of the variance. If the effect of the school setting on the
variance of students psychological well-being is minimal,
studies using psychological well-being measures to investigate the school effects are not likely to produce useful
results. The Psychological Well-Being scale (Ryff, 1989a)
is a relatively new tool and has not been administered to
adolescents in any prior studies. Even if it is based on a
solid theoretical structure, the validity of the use of this
measurement for short-term program evaluation may not
be tenable.

Limitations
One of the purposes of this study was to investigate
the effects of educational setting on the psychological
well-being and school satisfaction of high-ability students. A random sampling would have enabled more
robust causal interpretations of the effects of the special school. However, randomization was not feasible
ethically or practically in this study. This study could
not assign students to a treatment group, a science high
school, or a general high school for randomization, nor
1 8 0

G I F T E D

C H I L D

Q U A R T E R L Y

S P R I N G

could it change the current selection system into a drawing system for random sampling. Lack of random sampling limits the ability to make causal inferences about
the inuence of school type on student well-being and
satisfaction.
The study was quasi-experimental because intact
groups were used for the comparison. An effort was made
to ensure group comparability by selecting students of
similar ability levels from the same province in a relatively
homogenous country. However, there may have been
differences in the groups because the student attending the science high school had (a) chosen to apply and
(b) been accepted on a competitive basis. This creates a
selection threat to the validity of the study. For example,
perhaps the more educationally motivated students or the
more self-condent students were the ones who chose to
take advantage of the science high school opportunity. In
addition, although the students were similar with respect
to middle school grades and high school entrance exam
scores, they may have been different with respect to career
goals and interests. The families of the science high school
students may have been different in ways that inuenced
their outlook on schooling. In addition, students were
not pretested on well-being, so we dont know if the similar well-being of the students in both groups was related
to preexisting traits or to the inuence, positive or negative, of schooling. For example, it is possible that students
who score lower with respect to well-being choose to go
to special schools and then their well-being rises. Future
research should identify and control for such possible preexisting differences in high-ability students attending the
general and special high schools.
This study also has limitations in generalizing the
results to similar types of schools in other countries, and
even to other schools in Korea. For example, differences
in Korean educational environments, college entrance
systems, cultural environments, and family dynamics may create difculties in generalizing the results to
residential science high schools of Western countries.
In addition, educational environments in Korea and the
Korean science high schools themselves are changing a
lot, year by year. Hence, the study should be replicated
with other special schools both in Korea and in other
countries.

Implications for Research:

Affective Issues of the Gifted
Research on high-ability students has tended to focus
on the cognitive sphere, though a growing body of literature has recognized the importance of social and person2 0 0 6

V O L

5 0

N O

Downloaded from http://gcq.sagepub.com by kimbao bao on April 14, 2009

S C I E N C E

ality factors in work with high-ability students (Delisle,

1984, 1986; Neihart et al., 2002; Silverman, 1993). There
is strong support for educating highly able students in a
segregated setting on intellectual and academic grounds
(Feldhusen, 1989). However, little is known about the
effects of the educational setting on the social/emotional development of these students. This study was an
attempt to explore the effects of the segregated setting on
selected affective variables in high-ability students. The
failure to detect a signicant effect on psychological wellbeing may indicate that some socioemotional constructs
may be independent of the contextual features of daily
life and that a very minimal amount of variance may be
accounted for by the effect of a particular educational
setting. Alternatively, it may take a longer time in a new
setting for changes to occur in variables such as autonomy, personal growth, and purpose in life. Longitudinal
research is needed to determine whether these characteristics might change over time due to participation in
gifted programming.
This short-term socioemotional outcome study was
designed to set the stage for the continued elaboration of a
longitudinal model of students psychological well-being.
Longitudinal research will be necessary if the relationship between students psychological well-being and the
contextual features of school life is to be explored fully. It
would be particularly interesting to use growth curve analyses to investigate how psychological well-being interacts
with individual positive and negative events during the
school years and to nd the dynamics and mechanisms
of changing and improving levels of individual psychological well-being. In addition, this study suggests that we
need to search for more appropriate existing measures of
high-ability students well-being or create a whole new
measure for this purpose that is designed to measure wellbeing in high-ability youth.
On the other hand, in this study the more direct
approach to measuring gifted student well-being via a satisfaction scale distinctly revealed that the special school
setting was perceived favorably by high-ability students.
The satisfaction approach seems to be more suitable for
research questions about the appropriateness of specic
aspects of special educational programs for high-ability
students. However, it should be noted that students satisfaction is not always a valid measure of the success of
a program. For example, students sometimes dont like
interventions in the present even though they are very
helpful to them over a longer term perspective. Exploring
the effectiveness of schooling for high-ability students
should include more than measuring students satisfaction by asking students how satised they are with variG I F T E D

C H I L D

H I G H

S C H O O L

S T U D E N T S

ous aspects of their school life. It should also include the

impact of the intervention on variables like achievement,
specic social/emotional outcomes, career choices, and
talent development.

Implications for Practice:

Special Schools for the Gifted
Setting aside all inferential tests in this study, student
responses via open-ended questions also provided much
useful information. Almost all science high school students thought they had made the right choice to enter
a science high school and were enjoying educational
environments that they felt were especially suitable for
them. This nding supports previous research that has
found that residential high schools are a particularly
effective talent development context for high-ability
students (Feldhusen & Boggess, 2000; Kolloff, 2003).
Providing adequate educational services for high-ability students in both homogeneous and heterogeneous
contexts should be a major focus for all countries in the
21st century.

References
Allport, G. W. (1961). Pattern and growth in personality. New
York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Argyle, M., Martin, M., & Crossland, J. (1989). Happiness as
a function of personality and social encounters. In J. P.
Forgas & J. M. Innes (Eds.), Recent advances in social psychology: An international perspective (pp. 189203). Amsterdam:
North Holland Publishing Co.
Austin, A. B., & Draper, D. C. (1981). Peer relationships of
the academically gifted: A review. Gifted Child Quarterly,
25, 129133.
Barnett, L. B., & Durden, W. G. (1993). Education patterns
of academically talented youth. Gifted Child Quarterly, 37,
161168.
Benbow, C. P., & Lubinski, D. (1997). Intellectually talented
children: How can we best meet their needs? In N.
Colangelo & G. A. Davis (Eds.), Handbook of gifted education
(2nd ed., pp.155169). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Benbow, C. P., & Minor, L. L. (1990). Cognitive proles of verbally and mathematically precocious students:
Implications for identication of the gifted. Gifted Child
Quarterly, 34, 2126.
Benbow, C. P., & Stanley, J. (Eds.). (1983). Academic precocity:
Aspects of its development. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins
University Press.

Q U A R T E R L Y

S P R I N G

Downloaded from http://gcq.sagepub.com by kimbao bao on April 14, 2009

2 0 0 6

V O L

5 0

N O

1 8 1

S C I E N C E

H I G H

S C H O O L

S T U D E N T S

Bland, L. C., Sowa, C. J., & Callahan, C. M. (1994). An

overview of resilience in gifted children. Roeper Review,
17, 7780.
Borg, W. R., Gall, J. P., & Gall, M. D. (1993). Applying
educational research: A practical guide (3rd ed.). White Plains,
NY: Longman.
Bradburn, N. M. (1969). The structure of psychological well-being.
Chicago: Aldine Press.
Brody, L. E., & Stanley, J. C. (1991). Young college students: Assessing factors that contribute to success. In W.
T. Southern & E. D. Jones (Eds.), Academic acceleration of
gifted children (pp. 102132). New York: Teachers College
Press.
Bryant, M. A. (1991). Challenging gifted learners through
childrens literature. Gifted Child Today, 12(4), 4548.
Buhler, C. (1935). The curve of life as studied in biographics.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 19, 405409.
Carter, K. (1986). A cognitive outcome study to evaluate curriculum for the gifted. Journal for the Education of the Gifted,
10, 4155.
Clark, J. J., & Dixon, D. N. (1997). The impact of social skills
training on self-concept of gifted high school students.
Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 8, 179188.
Colangelo, N., Assouline, S. G., & Gross, M. U. M. (Eds.).
(2004). A nation deceived: How schools hold back Americas
brightest students (Vol. 2). Iowa City, IA: The Connie Belin
& Jacqueline N. Blank International Center for Gifted
Education and Talent Development.
Coleman, L. J. (2001). A rag quilt: Social relationships among
students in a special high school. Gifted Child Quarterly, 45,
164173.
Cornell, D. G. (1990). High ability students who are unpopular
with their peers. Gifted Child Quarterly, 34, 155160.
Cross, T. L., Coleman, L. J., & Terhaar-Yonkers, M. (1991).
The social cognition of gifted adolescents in schools:
Managing the stigma of giftedness. Journal for the Education
of the Gifted, 15, 4455.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal
experience. New York: Harper & Low.
Csikszentmihalyi, M., Rathunde, K., & Whalen, S. (1993).
Talented teenagers: The roots of success and failure. New York:
Cambridge University Press.
Davidson, J. E. (1986). The role of insight in giftedness. In R.
J. Sternberg & J. E. Davidson (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness
(pp. 201222). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Delcourt, M. A. B., Loyd, B. H., Cornell, D. G., & Goldberg,
M. D. L. (1994). Evaluation of the effects of programming
arrangements on student learning outcomes (Monograph of the
National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented No.
94108). Storrs, CT: University of Connecticut.
Delisle, J. R. (1984). Gifted children speak out. New York: Walker
& Co.
Delisle, J. R. (1986). Death with honors: Suicide among gifted
adolescents. Journal of Counseling and Development, 64,
558560.
1 8 2

G I F T E D

C H I L D

Q U A R T E R L Y

S P R I N G

Diener, E. (1984). Subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin,

95, 542575.
Diener, E. (2000). Subjective well-being: The science of happiness, and a proposal for a national index. The American
Psychologist, 55, 3443.
Dixon, F. A., Lapsley, D. K., & Hanchon, T. A. (2004). An
empirical typology of perfectionism in gifted adolescents.
Gifted Child Quarterly, 48, 95106.
Dorsel, T. N., & Wages, C. (1993). Gifted, residential education: Outcomes are largely favorable, but there are some
cautions. Roeper Review, 15, 239242.
Eilber, C. R. (1987). The North Carolina School of Science
and Mathematics. Phi Delta Kappan, 68, 773777.
Eilber, C. R., & Warshaw, S. J. (1988). North Carolina
School of Science and Mathematics: The special environment within a statewide science high school. In P. F.
Brandwein & A. H. Passow (Eds.), Gifted young in science:
Potential through performance (pp. 201207). Washington,
DC: National Science Teachers Association.
Erikson, E. (1959). Identity and the life cycle. Psychological
Issues, 1, 18164.
Feldhusen, J. F. (1989). Synthesis of research on gifted youth.
Educational Leadership, 46(6), 611.
Feldhusen, J. F., & Boggess, J. (2000). Secondary schools for
academically talented youth. Gifted Education International,
14, 170176.
Feldhusen, J. F., & Dai, D. Y. (1997). Gifted students attitudes and perceptions of the gifted label, special programs,
and peer relations. Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 9,
1520.
Feldhusen, J. F., & Kroll, M. D. (1991). Boredom or challenge
for the academically talented in school. Gifted Education
International, 7, 8081.
Feldhusen, J. F., VanTassel-Baska, J. L., & Seeley, K. R.
(1989). Excellence in educating the gifted. Denver, CO: Love
Publishing Company.
Fetterman, D. M. (1988). Excellence and equality: A qualitatively
different perspective on gifted and talented education. New York:
State University of New York Press.
Flanagan, J. C. (1979). Identifying opportunities for improving quality
of life of older age groups. Palo Alto, CA: American Institute
for Research in the Behavioral Sciences.
Fox, L. H., Brody, L., & Tobin, D. (1985). The impact of early
intervention programs upon course-taking and attitudes
in high school. In S. F. Chipman, L. R. Brush, & D. M.
Wilson (Eds.), Women and mathematics: Balancing the equation (pp. 249174). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Gallagher, J. J. (1986). The need for programs for young gifted
children. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 6,
18.
Gottfried, A. E., & Gottfried, A. W. (1996). A longitudinal
study of academic intrinsic motivation in intellectually
gifted children: Childhood through early adolescence.
Gifted Child Quarterly, 40, 179183.
2 0 0 6

V O L

5 0

N O

Downloaded from http://gcq.sagepub.com by kimbao bao on April 14, 2009

S C I E N C E

Grimm, L. G., & Yarnold, P. R. (1995). Reading and understanding

multivariate statistics. Washington, DC: American
Psychological Association.
Gross, M. U. M. (1993). Exceptionally gifted children. London:
Routledge.
Gross, M. U. M. (1994). Radical acceleration: Responding to
the academic and social needs of extremely gifted adolescents. Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 5(4), 2734.
Gross, M. U. M. (1998). Issues in assessing the highly gifted.
Understanding Our Gifted, 10(2), 38.
Gross, M. U. M. (2002). Social and emotional issues for exceptionally intellectually 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. 1929). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.
Herron, J. E. (1999). The relationship between coping strategy
and outcome after frontal lobe damage. Dissertation Abstracts
International, 60 (05), 2343B. (UMI No. AAT9930161)
Hollingworth, L. S. (1926). Gifted children: Their nature and nurture. New York: Macmillan.
Jackson, N. E. (1988). Precocious reading ability: What does it
mean? Gifted Child Quarterly, 32, 200204.
Jahoda, M. (1958). Current concepts of positive mental health. New
York: Basic Books.
Jin, S., & Feldhusen, J. F. (2000, July). Boredom or challenge of
gifted students in classrooms. Ideaccion, 16, 4757.
Jung, C. G. (1933). Modern man in search of a soul. New York:
Harcourt, Brace, & World.
Keiley, M. K. (1997). Affect regulation in adolescents: Does the management of feelings differ by gender and/or by method of measurement. Unpublished Manuscript.
Keppel, G. (1991). Design and analysis: A researchers handbook
(3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ; Prentice-Hall.
Kitano, M. K., & Lewis, R. B. (2005). Resilience and coping:
Implications for gifted children and youth at risk. Roeper
Review, 27, 200205.
Kolloff, P. B. (2003). State-supported residential high schools.
In N. Colangelo & G. A. Davis (Eds.), Handbook of Gifted
Education (3rd ed., pp. 238246). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Kulik, J. A., & Kulik, C. C. (1992). Meta-analytic ndings on
grouping programs. Gifted Child Quarterly, 36, 7377.
Lewis, G. (1993). Keeping the options open: Curriculum at the
Louisiana School for Math, Science and the Arts. Journal for
the Education of the Gifted, 16, 387399.
Lipkin, J. P. (1999). Person-organization t and creative thinking: A study of the relationship between person-organization value t and creative thinking. Dissertation Abstracts
International, 60 (05), 2398B. (UMI No. AAT9929046)
Lykken, D., & Tellegen, A. (1996). Happiness is a stochastic
phenomenon. Psychological Science, 7, 186189.
Maslow, A. H. (1968). Toward a psychology of being (2nd ed.).
New York: Van Nostrand.
Milgram, R. M., & Milgram, N. A. (1976). Personality
characteristics of gifted Israeli children. Journal of Genetic
Psychology, 129, 185194.
G I F T E D

C H I L D

H I G H

S C H O O L

S T U D E N T S

Moon, S. M. (2003). Developing personal talent. In F. J.

Mnks & H. Wagner (Eds.), Development of human potential:
Investment into our future. Proceedings of the 8th Conference of the
European Council for High Ability (ECHA; pp. 1121). Bad
Honnef, Germany: K. H. Bock.
Moon, S. M., Feldhusen, J. F., & Dillon, D. R. (1994). Longterm effects of an enrichment program based on the Purdue
Three-Stage Model. Gifted Child Quarterly, 38, 3848.
Moon, S. M., & Thomas, V. (2003). Family therapy with
gifted and talented adolescents. Journal of Secondary Gifted
Education, 14, 107113.
Myers, D. (2000). The funds, friends, and faith of happy people.
The American Psychologist, 55, 5667.
Nail, J. M., & Evans, J. G. (1997). The emotional adjustment
of gifted adolescents: A view of global functioning. Roeper
Review, 20, 1821.
Neihart, M. (2002). Risk and resilience in gifted children: A
conceptual framework. 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.
113122). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.
Neihart, M., Reis, S. M., Robinson, N. M., & Moon, S. M.
(Eds.). (2002). The social and emotional development of gifted
children: What do we know? Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.
Olszewski-Kubilius, P. M., & Grant, B. (1996). Academically
talented women and mathematics: The role of special
programs and support from others in acceleration, achievement and aspirations. In K. D. Noble & R. G. Subotnik
(Eds.), Remarkable women: Perspectives on female talent development (pp. 281294). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
Piechowski, M. M. (2003). Emotional and spiritual giftedness. In N. Colangelo & G. A. Davis (Eds.), Handbook of
gifted education (3rd ed., pp. 403416). Boston: Allyn and
Bacon.
Renzulli, J. S., & Reis, S. M. (1997). The schoolwide enrichment model: New directions for developing high-end
learning. In N. Colangelo & G. A. Davis (Eds.), Handbook
of gifted education (2nd ed., pp. 7588). Boston: Allyn and
Bacon.
Renzulli, J. S., Smith, L. H., White, A. J., Callahan, C. M., &
Hartman, R. K. (1976). Scales for the Rating of Behavioral
Characteristics of Superior Student. Manseld Center, CT:
Creative Learning Press.
Robinson, N. M., Reis, S. M., Neihart, M., & Moon, S. M.
(Eds.). (2002). Social and emotional issues: What have we
learned and what should we do now? 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. 267289). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.
Rogers, C. R. (1961). On becoming a person: A therapists view of
psychotherapy. Boston: Houghton Mifin.
Rogers, K. B. (1991). The relationship of grouping practices to the
education of the gifted and talented learner: An executive summary.
Storrs, CT: University of Connecticut, NRCG/T.

Q U A R T E R L Y

S P R I N G

Downloaded from http://gcq.sagepub.com by kimbao bao on April 14, 2009

2 0 0 6

V O L

5 0

N O

1 8 3

S C I E N C E

H I G H

S C H O O L

S T U D E N T S

Rogers, K. B. (2002). Grouping the gifted and talented:

Questions and answers. Roeper Review, 24, 102107.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory
and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development and well-being. American Psychologist, 55, 6878.
Ryff, C. D. (1989a). Beyond Ponce de Leon and life satisfaction: New directions in quest successful aging. International
Journal of Behavioral Development, 12, 3555.
Ryff, C. D. (1989b). Happiness is everything, or is it?
Explorations on the meaning of psychological well-being.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 10691081.
Ryff, C. D. (1992). The interpretation of life experience and
well-being: The sample case of grown children and self.
Psychology and Aging, 7, 507517.
Ryff, C. D. (1995). The structure of psychological well-being
revisited. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69,
719727.
Ryff, C. D., Lee, Y., & Na, K. (1993). Through the lens of culture:
Psychological well-being at midlife. Unpublished manuscript,
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Silverman, L. K. (1993). The gifted individual. In L. K.
Silverman (Ed.), Counseling the gifted and talented (pp. 328).
Denver, CO: Love Publishing Company.
Slavin, R. E. (1990). Achievement effects of ability grouping
in secondary schools: A best-evidence synthesis. Review of
Educational Research, 60, 471499.
Smith, C. B. (1991). Literature for gifted and talented. The
Reading Teacher, 44, 608609.
Sowa, C. J., & May, K. M. (1997). Expanding Lazarus and
Folkmans paradigm to the social and emotional adjustment of gifted children and adolescents (SEAM). Gifted
Child Quarterly, 41, 3643.
Speirs Neumeister, K. L. (2004). Factors inuencing the development of perfectionism in gifted college students. Gifted
Child Quarterly, 48, 259274.
Stanley, J. C. (1991). A better model for residential high schools
for talented youths. Phi Delta Kappan, 72(6), 471473.
Stones, M. J., Hadjistavropoulos, T., Tuukko, H., & Kozma, A.
(1995). Happiness has traitlike and statelike properties: A
reply to Veenhoven. Social Indicators Research, 36, 129144.
Swaitek, M. A., & Benbow, C. P. (1991). Ten-year longitudinal
follow-up of ability-matched accelerated and unaccelerated
gifted students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 528538.
Tannenbaum, A. (1983). Gifted children: Psychological and educational perspectives. New York: Macmillan.

1 8 4

G I F T E D

C H I L D

Q U A R T E R L Y

S P R I N G

Terman, L. M. (1925). Genetic studies of genius: Vol. 1. Mental

and physical traits of a thousand gifted children. Stanford, CA:
Stanford University Press.
Terman, L. M., & Oden, M. H. (1947). Genetic studies of genius:
Vol. 4. The gifted child grows up. Stanford, CA: Stanford
University Press.
Vaughn, V. L., Feldhusen, J. F., & Asher, J. W. (1991). Metaanalyses and review of research on pull-out programs in
gifted education. Gifted Child Quarterly, 35, 9298.
Veenhoven, R. (1984). Conditions of happiness. Dordrecht, The
Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Veenhoven, R. (1994). Is happiness a trait? Tests of the theory
that a better society does not make people any happier.
Social Indicators Research, 33, 101160.
Walberg, H. J., Tsai, S., Weinstein, T., Gabriel, C. L., Rasher,
S. P., Rosecrans, T., et al. (1981). Childhood traits and
environmental conditions of highly eminent adults. Gifted
Child Quarterly, 25, 103107.
Wendorf, D. J., & Frey, J. (1985). Family therapy with the
intellectually gifted. The American Journal of Family Therapy,
13, 3138.
Westberg, K. L., Archambault, F. X., Dobyns, S. M., & Salvin,
T. J. (1993). The classroom practices observational study.
Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 16, 120146.
Whitmore, J. R. (1980). Giftedness, conict, and underachievement.
Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Winner, E. (1997). Exceptionally high intelligence and schooling. American Psychologist, 52, 10701081.
Winner, E., & Martino, G. (2000). Giftedness in non-academic
domains: The case of the visual arts and music. In K. A.
Heller, F. J. Mnks, R. J. Sternberg, & R. F. Subotnik
(Eds.), International handbook of giftedness and talent (2nd ed.,
pp. 95110). Oxford, England: Pergamon Press.
Wu, W. T., Cho, S., & Munandar, U. (2000). Programs and
practices for identifying and nurturing giftedness and talent
in Asia (outside the mainland of China). In K. A. Heller,
F. J. Mnks, R. J. Sternberg, & R. F. Subotnik (Eds.),
International handbook of giftedness and talent (2nd ed., pp.
765777). Oxford, England: Pergamon Press.

Author Note
This work was partially supported by the Faculty Research
Fund of Konkuk University.

2 0 0 6

V O L

5 0

N O

Downloaded from http://gcq.sagepub.com by kimbao bao on April 14, 2009