After reading just the Abstract, I am pausing to share my observation that the study appears to focus on what ongoing ACHIEVEMENTS (such as degree attainment and level of salary earned), if any, are recognized through the years, by gifted children who attended Gifted Children Programming (GCP), as opposed to gifted children who did not have access to such programs.
It has long been my impression that gifted education existed not necessarily to propel children forward for greater achievement, but to meet their educational needs and facilitate their ongoing positive development:
1) the continued growth of their brain via the stimulation of learning something new every day and experiencing appropriate challenge (thereby approximating what many/most children experience in a classroom),
2) the ability for gifted pupils to access a sense of "belonging" via placement amongst the company of their intellectual peers (thereby approximating what many/most children experience in a classroom),
3) fewer gifted drop-outs, and well-adjusted, resilient gifted adults (thereby approximating what many/most children may take-away from their educational experience).
I will continue reading... digesting 124 pages may take a while!
