The Marland Report included many correct observations about gifted education. Some findings, for example, were based on Project Talent, a large‐scale population representative longitudinal study of the US high school population. This paper uses the intersection of cognitive aptitudes and gifted education as a framework and synthesizes studies using prospective longitudinal data from numerous sources. Additional retrospective data on US high achievers are reviewed, as are longitudinal findings from other countries. All these sources will be used to reevaluate a selected set of claims made in the Marland Report. Specifically, we explore (a) the definition and understanding of gifted students; (b) the identification of and longitudinal research on gifted students; and (c) we briefly discuss the context of the Marland Report in the wider history of education policy and reform in the US, including how to best support talented students using information from the field of education policy.
We examined the state of Arkansas, empirically testing how focusing on high-achieving students using state tests might expand the pool of gifted identified students. From a broader sample of 173,133 students, we compared the degree to which students who were academically talented in the top 5% on third-grade state literacy and math assessments were identified as gifted in Arkansas. Across five independent cohorts, we replicated the finding that roughly 30% of the students in the top 5% on both third-grade literacy and math were not identified as gifted. Logistic regression ( N = 3992) indicated that high-achieving students participating in the federal Free/Reduced Lunch program were 50% less likely to be identified. These findings suggest that using state math and literacy assessments as universal screening tools could improve gifted identification of high-achieving students, many from low-income or other disadvantaged backgrounds.
The COVID-19 pandemic and the shutdown of schools created disruptions in Vietnamese education, which has not been evaluated to date. This paper provides an analysis of the effect of COVID-19 policies on teaching and learning in higher education in Vietnam. We first contextualize higher education in Vietnam prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. We then present an analysis of the Vietnamese government’s educational policies aimed at controlling virus spread with respect to Vietnam’s inequalities of access to higher education, quality of curriculum and instruction, and institutional autonomy. Our analysis focuses on how government policies can simultaneously respond to the pandemic and moderate prior educational issues. Through this analysis, we contrast the advantages and disadvantages of the policies and highlight the challenges Vietnamese universities face in policy implementation. We conclude this paper by discussing the implications of changes made during the pandemic to comment on higher education in Vietnam post-COVID-19.
Under globalisation, comparative educational studies have become more relevant. This paper is the first of its kind to compare education and training for principals in Vietnam and the U.S. and will offer among the few systematic studies on school leadership in Vietnam. Utilizing previous research on educational leadership and culture in the U.S. and Vietnam, and survey results from Teaching and Learning International Survey (TALIS) from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) in 2018, I used t-test analyses to test several hypotheses about the differences between principals in the two countries. The findings suggest differences in age, gender, managerial experience, teaching obligation, and obtained levels of education and training between American principals and Vietnamese principals. Principals in the U.S. are younger and less experienced than principals in Vietnam. Level of education and need for professional development programs potentially indicate that American principals receive more thorough training in their education compared to Vietnamese principals. Accordingly, this comparative study provides valuable insights for both countries and contributes to diversifying the literature on educational leadership which the West has long dominated.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.