Abstract
Education for gifted children is currently one of the hottest educational issues in Korea. Much money and effort are being invested in this area of education. Recent announcements by the Korean Ministry of Education state that all children should be educated to the level of which they are capable, and the current program for gifted students should be and will be extended. However, there is little attention paid to the actual substance of gifted education in Korea. What is happening in the name of gifted education? What is the meaning of giftedness and gifted education? How and in what respects can the gifted program be differentiated from general programs? What are the problems and concerns in serving gifted students? What are the effects of gifted programs? These are the main questions of the present qualitative study. For the purposes of this ethnographic study, the ISEP science gifted education center in Korea was observed for a six-month period, and 10 professors and 50 students at the ISEP were interviewed in depth. The results of the study are as follows. First of all, the ISEP science gifted education center provides differentiated learning environments and teaching methods. Second, through these differentiated learning experiences, students improve their thinking skills and creative problem solving abilities, as well as developing positive self-esteem. In addition, the formation of human net works, the special meaning of the ‘gifted’ label, and the acquisition of personal knowledge were seen to be some of the major educative possibilities on offer at the ISEP gifted education center. However, some professors’ low levels of motivation, the absence of individualized educational plans, bureaucratic management, weak student commitment to set tasks, and a lack of opportunity for students’ social activities were clearly limitations of the ISEP gifted education center. The results of this study will contribute to, specifically, the search for new ideas to improve the operation of gifted education as well as helping to surmount the hidden problems lurking beneath the surface of the current gifted education practices in Korea, and, more generally, to enhance our understanding of the diverse gifted educational practices in operation worldwide.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Barone, D. (2003). Turning the looking glass inside out: A gifted student in an at-risk setting.Gifted Child Quarterly, 47(4), 259–271.
Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. (1982).Qualitative research for education. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Borland, J. H. (2004).Rethinking gifted education. New York: Teachers College Press.
Colangelo, N., & Brwoer, P. (1987). Gifted youngsters and their siblings: Long-term impact of labeling on their academic and personal self-concepts.Roeper Review, 10, 101–103.
Coleman, L., Sanders, M., & Cross, T. (1997). Perennial debates and tacit assumptions in the education of gifted children.Gifted Child Quarterly, 41, 105–111.
Coleman, L., & Cross, T. (2001).Being gifted in school: An introduction to development, guidance, and teaching. Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.
Cross, T., Coleman, L., & Stewart, R. (1993). The schoolbased social cognition of gifted adolescents: An exploration of the stigma of the giftedness paradigm.Roeper Review, 16, 37–40.
Cross, T., Stewart, R., & Coleman, L. (2003). Phenomenology and its implications for gifted studies research.Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 26(3), 201–220.
Delcourt, M. (1994).Qualitative extension of the learning outcomes study. Research Monograph, 94–110.
Han, K. S. (2004).Why & how we apply PBL in sciencegifted education? Paper presented at the 8th Asia- Pacific Conference on giftedness. Dajeon, Korea.
Hershey, M., & Oliver, E. (1988). The effects of the label gifted on students identified for gifted programs.Roeper Review, 11, 33–34.
Herzog, N. (2003). Impact of gifted programs from the students’ perspectives.Gifted Child Quarterly, 47(2), 131–143.
Kerr, B., Colangelo, N., & Gaeth, J. (1988). Gifted adolescents’ attitudes toward their giftedness.Gifted Child Quarterly, 32, 245–247.
Lee, S. Y., Cramond, B., & Lee, J. (2004). Korean teachers’ attitudes toward academic brilliance.Gifted Child Quarterly, 48(1), 42–53.
Lincoln, Y., & Guba, E. (1985).Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Stanford University Press.
Mendaglio, S. (2003). Qualitative case study in gifted education.Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 26(3), 163–183.
Neumeister, K., & Hebert, T. (2003). Underachievement versus selective achievement.Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 26(3), 221–238.
Peine, M. (2003). Doing grounded theory research with gifted students.Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 26(3), 184–200.
Polanyi, M. (1958).Personal knowledge: Toward a postcritical philosophy. NY: Chicago University Press.
Silverman, L. (1994).Counseling the gifted and talented. Denver, CO: Love.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990).Basics of qualitative research: Ground theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Tomlinson, C. (2002).The parallel curriculum. Thousand Oak, CA: Corwin Press.
VanTassel-Baska, J., & Feng, A. (2004).Designing and utilizing evaluation for gifted program improvement. Waco, TX: Prufrock Press Inc.
Whitehead, A. (1967).The aims of education and other essays. New York: The Free Press.
Woods, P. (1996). Critical students: Breakthroughs in learning. In P. Woods (Ed.),Contemporary issues in teaching and learning. London: Routledge. 450–463.
References
Barone, D. (2003). Turning the looking glass inside out: A gifted student in an at-risk setting.Gifted Child Quarterly, 47(4), 259–271.
Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. (1982).Qualitative research for education. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Borland, J. H. (2004).Rethinking gifted education. New York: Teachers College Press.
Colangelo, N., & Brwoer, P. (1987). Gifted youngsters and their siblings: Long-term impact of labeling on their academic and personal self-concepts.Roeper Review, 10, 101–103.
Coleman, L., Sanders, M., & Cross, T. (1997). Perennial debates and tacit assumptions in the education of gifted children.Gifted Child Quarterly, 41, 105–111.
Coleman, L., & Cross, T. (2001).Being gifted in school: An introduction to development, guidance, and teaching. Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.
Cross, T., Coleman, L., & Stewart, R. (1993). The schoolbased social cognition of gifted adolescents: An exploration of the stigma of the giftedness paradigm.Roeper Review, 16, 37–40.
Cross, T., Stewart, R., & Coleman, L. (2003). Phenomenology and its implications for gifted studies research.Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 26(3), 201–220.
Delcourt, M. (1994).Qualitative extension of the learning outcomes study. Research Monograph, 94–110.
Han, K. S. (2004).Why & how we apply PBL in sciencegifted education? Paper presented at the 8th Asia- Pacific Conference on giftedness. Dajeon, Korea.
Hershey, M., & Oliver, E. (1988). The effects of the label gifted on students identified for gifted programs.Roeper Review, 11, 33–34.
Herzog, N. (2003). Impact of gifted programs from the students’ perspectives.Gifted Child Quarterly, 47(2), 131–143.
Kerr, B., Colangelo, N., & Gaeth, J. (1988). Gifted adolescents’ attitudes toward their giftedness.Gifted Child Quarterly, 32, 245–247.
Lee, S. Y., Cramond, B., & Lee, J. (2004). Korean teachers’ attitudes toward academic brilliance.Gifted Child Quarterly, 48(1), 42–53.
Lincoln, Y., & Guba, E. (1985).Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Stanford University Press.
Mendaglio, S. (2003). Qualitative case study in gifted education.Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 26(3), 163–183.
Neumeister, K., & Hebert, T. (2003). Underachievement versus selective achievement.Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 26(3), 221–238.
Peine, M. (2003). Doing grounded theory research with gifted students.Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 26(3), 184–200.
Polanyi, M. (1958).Personal knowledge: Toward a postcritical philosophy. NY: Chicago University Press.
Silverman, L. (1994).Counseling the gifted and talented. Denver, CO: Love.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990).Basics of qualitative research: Ground theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Tomlinson, C. (2002).The parallel curriculum. Thousand Oak, CA: Corwin Press.
VanTassel-Baska, J., & Feng, A. (2004).Designing and utilizing evaluation for gifted program improvement. Waco, TX: Prufrock Press Inc.
Whitehead, A. (1967).The aims of education and other essays. New York: The Free Press.
Woods, P. (1996). Critical students: Breakthroughs in learning. In P. Woods (Ed.),Contemporary issues in teaching and learning. London: Routledge.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Han, KS. The Possibilities and Limitations of Gifted Education in Korea: A Look at the ISEP Science- Gifted Education Center. Asia Pacific Educ. Rev. 8, 450–463 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03026473
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03026473