Teachers' Preferences on the Issue of Segregation of Gifted Pupils in Czech Educational System
The issue of inclusion - segregation in the current Czech educational system is highly actual due to changes in legislation. It applies primarily to pupils with special educational needs, but it should also apply to pupils with giftedness. The paper presents chosen results of an exploratory survey that was carried out on a convenience sample of 1101 Czech teachers working in lower secondary education (ISCED2). The rate of teachers´ agreement with segregation of gifted pupils in the education system was monitored during this investigation. A validated questionnaire of our own design was used for the purpose of this investigation. The results were compared across groups of teachers in terms of selected variables. Results show that 36,3 % of teachers incline to segregation (rather than inclusion) of gifted pupils. Teachers who are not educated in this field and have no experience in teaching gifted pupils tend to support their segregation more in comparison with other teachers. Teachers of specialized schools for gifted pupils paradoxically agree with segregation to a slightly lesser extent than teachers from traditional schools, but they also manifest the most hesitant attitude in this issue. Preferences for segregation of gifted pupils are not related to attitudes toward gifted pupils or teachers' self-evaluation in terms of care for the gifted. Investigation indicates that the issue of education of gifted children and their inclusion in the educational system needs more space within the further education of teachers.
 Heward, W. L. (2013). Exceptional Children. An Introduction to Special Education. Ohio: Pearson Education.
 Porter, L. (1999). Gifted Young Children. A guide for teachers and parents. Buckingham: Open University Press.
 Winebrenner, S. (2001). Teaching Gifted Kids in the Regular Classroom. Minneapolis: Free Spirit Publishing.
 Davis G. A., Rimm S. B. & Del Siege (2011). Education of the Gifted and Talented. New Jersey: Pearson.
 Škrabánková, J. (2012). Žijeme s nadáním. Ostrava Ostravská univerzita v Ostravě, Pedagogická fakulta.
 Havigerová, J. M. (2011). Pět pohledů na nadání. Praha: Grada.
 Olszewski-Kubilius, P. (2010). Special schools and other options for gifted STEM students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 32, 61-70.
 Clark, B. (2013). Growing up gifted. Developing the potential of children at home and at school. California: Pearson.
 Hříbková, L. (2009). Nadání a nadaní. Pedagogicko-psychologické přístupy, modely, výzkumy a jejich vztah ke školské praxi. Praha: Psyché.
 Vialle, W. (1994). 'Termanal' Science? The Work of Lewis Terman Revisited. Roeper Review, 17, 1, 32-38.
 Freeman, J. (1979). Gifted children. London: International Medical Publishers.
 Smith, Chris. M. M., 2006. Principles of inclusion: implications for able learners. In SMITH, Chris. M. M. (ed.) Including the Gifted and Talented. Making inclusion work for more gifted and able learners. London and New York: Routledge, pp. 3 – 21.
 McBee, M.T. & Fields, S. (2014). Special Schools for the Gifted. In Plucker, J.A. & C.M. Callahan. Critical Issues and Practices in Gifted Education. What the Research Says. Texas: Prufrock Press. 623 – 631.
 Chráska, M., & Kočvarová, I. (2015). Kvantitativní metody sběru dat v pedagogických výzkumech. Zlín: Univerzita Tomáše Bati ve Zlíně, Fakulta humanitních studií.
 McCoach, D.B. & Siege, D (2007). What Predics Teachers´Attitudes Toward the Gifted? The Gifted Child Quarterly. 51,3, pp. 246 – 255.
 Bégin, J, & Gagné, F (1994). Predictors of sttitudes toward gifted education: A review of the literature and blueprints for future research. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 17, pp. 161 – 179.
 Gross, T.L. (2011). On the Social and Emotional Lives of Gifted Children. USA: Prufrock press.
 Urbánek, T., Denglerová, D., & Širůček, J. (2011). Psychometrika: měření v psychologii. Praha: Portál.
 Řehák, J. (1978). K pojmu „reprezentativita“ v sociologických výzkumech. Sociologický časopis/Czech Sociological Review. Praha: Sociologický ústav AV ČR, 14 (5), 489-507.