Blending Research-Based Practices and Practice-Embedded Research: Project Excite Closes Achievement and Excellence Gaps for Underrepresented Gifted Minority Students
Abstract
In this article, we advocate for a new movement in education, particularly an approach emphasizing blending research-based practice with practice-embedded research. We do so by describing and discussing Project Excite, a working example that demonstrates such a model in the context of gifted education. We first trace the history, the impetus, and key design elements of Project Excite, a front-loading intervention aiming to develop the potential of underrepresented students for advanced science, technology, engineering, and mathematics learning from early grades. We review a line of past research and key findings on Project Excite over its 14-year journey. We then discuss the implication of Project Excite for gifted programming in gifted education. Last, we pinpoint some questions to inspire future research and practice.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Project Excite students, when they entered high school, were outperforming their minority peers and their performance was almost comparable to White students.
“When these students entered high school, they were outperforming their minority peers and their performance was almost”
From Gifted Students (2019) · cites this paper as Olszewski-Kubilius & Steenbergen-Hu 2017
Some underrepresented gifted students achieve comparable performance only after intensive enrichment efforts.
“some of them achieve comparable performance only after intensive enrichment efforts (e.g., Horn 2015, Olszewski-Kubilius & Steenbergen-Hu 2017, Olszewski-Kubilius et al. 2017).”
From Gifted Students (2019) · cites this paper as Olszewski-Kubilius & Steenbergen-Hu 2017
Some underrepresented gifted students achieve comparable performance only after intensive enrichment efforts.
“some of them achieve comparable performance only after intensive enrichment efforts (e.g., Horn 2015, Olszewski-Kubilius & Steenbergen-Hu 2017, Olszewski-Kubilius et al. 2017).”
From Gifted Students (2019) · cites this paper as Olszewski-Kubilius et al. 2017
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Worrell, F. C., Subotnik, R. F., Olszewski-Kubilius, P., & Dixson, D. D. (2019) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-010418-102846 · Cited by 245 · see citing works
Self-citation
- Authors
- Olszewski-Kubilius, P., & Steenbergen-Hu, S.
- Affiliations
- Northwestern University, Evanston, IL, USA
- Venue
- Gifted Child Quarterly
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2017-04-08
- Volume
- 61
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 202-209
- ISSN
- 0016-9862 (ISSN-L)
- 1934-9041
- OpenAlex
- W2604656770
- Cited by
- 19
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 3
- FWCI
- 2.14
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Gifted Child Quarterly (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Education, Achievement, and Giftedness
- Social Sciences › Safety Research › Career Development and Diversity
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Critical Race Theory in Education
- Keywords
- gifted education, underrepresented minority students, achievement gap, evidence-informed practice
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
