According to Goodlad, slippage is likely to occur when an idea from the ideological domain is put into practice. Some of its elements may be modified through the sociopolitical and personal interpretative processes involved.

The study used the Goodlad Conceptual System as a guide to trace slippage between the ideological and formal domains. These domains are among the five domains of a curriculum that are identified by the Conceptual System. The ideological domain contains the ideas of an educational planning group while the formal domain contains the written curriculum.

Three minor questions needed to be answered before the study could answer the major question. The first one concerned the development of a framework for analysis. The second and third ones concerned the analysis of the two domains of each sample program.

A descriptive procedure was employed in the study. The design permitted the analysis of slippage between egalitarian and elitist positions embraced in the two domains of each sample program.

The sample consisted of the eighteen programs from the Educational Research Service, 1979, and additional information from their school districts and state guidelines.

This study attempted to provide a better perspective for understanding slippage that might occur in the implementation of the idea of "equality of educational opportunity" in the selected gifted programs.

The inferential value position(s) underlying the ideological domain was revealed by an analysis of the statements of philosophy of the program. The inferential value position(s) underlying the formal domain was revealed by an analysis of its definition of giftedness and the identification and selection methods used. Slippage between the two domains, if any, was revealed by an assessment of the inconsistencies between these inferential value positions.

The study provided two main conclusions. First, the study found a way to analyze slippage between the two domains of a gifted program regarding the concept of equality of educational opportunity. Second, some slippage was found, thus making more credible Goodlad's conception of curriculum domains.

The major question was: What are the patterns of slippage between the value positions of equality of educational opportunity underlying the two domains of the sample programs?