No abstract

No abstract

Academic underachievement is a national problem according to the U.S. Department of Education (1993) report, National Excellence: A Case for Developing America's Talent. The report states that 40% of the top 5% of high school graduates will not graduate from college. Not only is underachievement a problem among gifted students, it also appears to be a problem at all ability levels. A report by the Carnegie Corporation of New York (1996) indicates that by the fourth grade, the performance of most American children has dropped below grade level; it has also dropped below the performance level of fourth graders from other countries, many of which are our economic competitors.

Science curriculum reform, the act of restructuring science curriculum, is advocated by major educational stakeholders in the nation for improving student science achievement and attitudes toward science. An approach for restructuring science curricula is to include science intervention programs in established curricula. For this study, the effectiveness of a science intervention program on science achievement and attitudes of middle‐grade students attending a 5‐week academic enrichment program was determined. Effective curricular components, as identified by relevant research studies, were incorporated in the intervention program. Those components included appropriate content, as designated by national standards and state‐mandated instructional objectives for Georgia, and the learning cycle teaching procedure. A mixed‐methodology research design was used. For the quantitative data, a criterion‐referenced test and a survey measuring attitudes toward science were administered to the students at the beginning and end of the program. Correlational t‐tests were conducted using pretest and posttest scores from the criterion‐referenced test and pretest and posttest attitude survey scores. Students' science achievement (p < .001) and attitudes toward science (p < .05) were higher following participation in the science intervention program. Qualitative data, which included narrative descriptions of students' behaviors as recorded in a teacher‐researcher daily log, supported the findings of the quantitative research. Results from the study provide implications for science curriculum reform.

This article focuses on the learning style preferences of achieving and underachieving gifted middle school students. Learning style was determined through administration of the Learning Style Inventory (LSI). Both groups of participants revealed several learning style preferences that were quite similar. However, examination of LSI profiles revealed some differences between achievers and underachievers in preferences for quiet or sound, flexibility or structure in assignments, and level of need for mobility. Many low achievers showed a strong need for tactile and kinesthetic modalities; intake of food, drinks, or both; sound in the learning environment; informal seating design; and dim lighting. The low achievers did not perceive themselves to be persistent, and scores revealed that they needed structure in assignments. Persistence seemed to be a key to success for the achieving learners in this study since they were able to maintain high academic performance in all content areas. Over half of the low achievers, on the other hand, did not judge themselves to be successful at task completion.