Abstract
Dr. James J. Gallagher (1926–2014) believed that all children deserved the very best educational opportunities regardless of age, ability, or social status. His work addressed early intervention supports for young children and their families, special education services for students with disabilities, and the educational needs of students with gifts and talents. Dr. Gallagher’s research built a knowledge base to support practice, inform policy, and shape educational theories. His work encompassed all levels of education, from the classroom to international networks. He believed that education was a “team game” and that an effective education required a strong infrastructure including professional development, technical assistance, policies, resources, and accountability for outcomes. He held that settling for a mediocre education was not an option and understood the substantial and sustained investment needed for a first-class educational system.
In this special issue, we pay tribute to Gallagher’s work by examining representative articles in five major areas in gifted education: theories of giftedness, curriculum and instruction, social and cultural acceptance of giftedness, the needs of underrepresented gifted students, and gifted educational policies. Two articles represent each area: an article by Gallagher and a reflection on its significance. Each reflection addresses three questions: “What were Dr. Gallagher’s major ideas?” “What is the current state of the field?” and “What would Dr. Gallagher advise us to do as we move forward?”
The first pair of articles explores beliefs about giftedness. Gallagher (2008) revealed his recent thinking in his chapter “Psychology, Psychologists, and Gifted Students.” In her reflection, “Theories of Giftedness: Reflections on James Gallagher’s Work,” Dr. Joyce VanTassel-Baska explores Dr. Gallagher’s thinking on a variety of dimensions related to our understanding of giftedness, including the contributions of environment and genetics in giftedness, the need for early interventions, the importance of tailoring interventions to specific needs for effective treatments, the increasing differences that should result from a differentiated education, the relationship of special and gifted education, and his insistence that field ask the tough questions. She summarizes the dilemmas we currently face with identification and services, and shares her views on where Dr. Gallagher would advise us to go.
The second area addressed is curriculum and instruction. The focus article, “Teacher Variation in Concept Presentation in BSCS Curriculum Program” (Gallagher, 1967), is Gallagher’s report of early research coding the cognitive level of teachers’ questions and student responses using the Topic Classification System developed with his colleague Mary Jane Aschner. In their response, “What Were Willie and Xavier Thinking? A Reflection on James Gallagher’s Research on Student–Teacher Interaction,” Drs. Shelagh Gallagher, Richard Courtright, and Linda Robinson discuss how Gallagher’s early life experiences at the Falk School shaped his appreciation for both a strong curriculum and skilled teachers. The findings of this early work show the impact of individual questions on higher order thinking, the relationship of student talk and student learning, the importance of curriculum fidelity, and the need for professional development in designing questions and assessing questioning technique. The authors reflect on current trends in curriculum standards and intentional teaching. They conclude that Gallagher would advise more in-depth research on curriculum efficacy and more professional development that prepares teachers to become reflective practitioners.
The social and cultural acceptance of gifted students is the third area addressed, with Dr. Gallagher’s formative article, “Peer Acceptance of Highly Gifted Children in Elementary School,” published in 1958. In this article, Dr. Gallagher explores the social and emotional impact of being a gifted child in a culture that is often ambivalent about exceptional ability. One conclusion he reached was that highly gifted children are less likely to experience social problems if they are grouped with other children with similar abilities. Dr. Del Siegle’s response, “Dr. James Gallagher’s Concern for Gifted Learners Beyond Academics,” points out the contemporary relevance of this early work as we continue to seek full support for gifted children. Dr. Siegle reminds us that curricular adaptations like acceleration, designed to respond to academic needs, also address social needs. He also echoes Gallagher’s call for knowledgeable and caring teachers who can support the intellectual and emotional development of the child.
The fourth area is the underrepresentation in gifted education of children from culturally different families, with the focus article, “Education of Gifted Students: A Civil Rights Issue?” (Gallagher, 1995) in which he continues to explore the need for equity and excellence. In their reflection, “Children of Promise: Dr. James Gallagher’s Thoughts on Underrepresentation Within Gifted Education,” Dr. Mary Ruth Coleman and Ms. Sneha Shah-Coltrane share foundational work published in a conference report, “Talent Delayed–Talent Denied” (Gallagher & Kinney, 1974) that details the critical importance of nurturing children’s abilities. Coleman and Shah-Coltrane indicate that although progress has been made, there is much work to be done; they close by underscoring Dr. Gallagher’s belief that the failure to address talented children from culturally different groups is a tragic waste of human potential.
The fifth and final area addressed is policy. In the focus reading, “Political Issues in Gifted Education” (Gallagher, 2013), Dr. Gallagher shared his most recent thinking on the importance of policy and its role in ensuring services for gifted students. In their response, “Reflections on Policy in Gifted Education: James J. Gallagher,” Drs. Elissa Brown and Rebecca Garland share Dr. Gallagher’s abiding commitment to developing an educational infrastructure including research and evaluation, differentiated curriculum, personnel preparation, technical assistance/demonstration models, technology, and long-range planning initiatives to support high-quality gifted education. Drs. Brown and Garland discuss general education efforts that focus on educational excellence and conclude that Dr. Gallagher would want us to continue to find ways for all students to develop their unique talents and abilities to the fullest.
We express our thanks to the publications where the original articles and chapters appeared, to our colleagues who worked with us on this, and to the staff of Journal for the Education of the Gifted (JEG) who supported this work. We have included the reprinted articles as they originally appeared in their initial publications, and only minor formatting changes were made to match the current JEG heading styles. Special thanks to Dr. Jennifer Robins, managing editor of JEG, whose patience and encouragement meant so much, and Dr. Tracy L. Cross, editor-in-chief of JEG, for allowing us to create this tribute to Dr. James J. Gallagher.