Su búsqueda

Historically, gifted children have been viewed as one of our nation's most precious yet underdeveloped resources. 'Virtually any resource, whether tangible or intangible can be turned into a gift'. Therefore, it is important to ensure that the designation of giftedness is not like toilet paper cover, but is instead productively given, received, and fostered. This chapter first reviews the general literature on gifts from the perspective of both the giver and the receiver, establishing the attributes of gifts that are and are not appreciated. It then examines how closely current approaches to giftedness fit four attributes of a valued gift. The four attributes of a meaningful gift are: giver motivations and expectations; understanding the gift; caring for and cultivating the gift; and desirability of the gift. The chapter then explores the four attributes in relation to current approaches to giftedness. The goal is to determine whether our conceptions and practices result in outcomes that are highly valued by gifted individuals and their society. It is important that gifted individuals and other members of society never perceive giftedness as an extravagant burden that they then hide or ignore. Finally, the chapter draws conclusions and makes recommendations for the future of giftedness. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

This entry includes the following entries: theories of giftedness; mental processes; identifying and fostering giftedness. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: create)

Proposes a subtheory of intellectual giftedness according to which giftedness is understood in terms of 3 types of insight skills: (a) selective encoding, by which relevant information in a given context is sifted from irrelevant information; (b) selective combination, by which relevant information is combined in a novel and productive way; and (c) selective comparison, by which new information is related in a novel way to old information. This conceptualization is compared with traditional views of giftedness and insight in terms of theory and implications for assessment. It is shown how the theory could be tested. Some preliminary data are presented on the relation between insight skills and IQ and measures of inductive and deductive reasoning. (11 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)

Proposes a subtheory of intellectual giftedness based upon the centrality of insight skills in giftedness. It is argued that insight involves not 1, but 3 separate but related psychological processes—selective encoding, selective combination, and selective comparison. The products of these operations are referred to as "insights" when the basic clues are encoded, combined, or compared in nonstandard, and even highly novel, ways. The theory was tested with 4th-, 5th-, and 6th-grade normal and gifted Ss. In Exp I, gifted and nongifted Ss were either precued as to what information in each of a set of insight problems was relevant for problem solution, or not so precued in a test of selective encoding. In Exp II, selective combination in insightful problem solving was tested in 74 gifted and nongifted Ss, who received mathematical insight problems presented either in the standard format, or with cuing intended to facilitate selective combination processes. In Exp III, the role of selective comparison in insightful problem solving was assessed, with Ss receiving 2 different example problems prior to receiving the insight problems. Results of all 3 experiments support the subtheory of intellectual giftedness. The development of a training program for 4th-, 5th-, and 6th-graders based upon the tenets of the subtheory is described. The program consisted of direct instruction, group-problem solving, individual problem solving, and games. The results suggest that insight skills are at least somewhat trainable. (5 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)

There are many ways to conceptualize giftedness, ranging from practical conceptualizations based on years of experience in working with gifted students to political conceptualizations based on moral principles. However, the distinguishing feature of the scientific study of giftedness is that theories are tested against evidence that has been collected using sound methodologies. The theme of this chapter is that there is value in the scientific study of giftedness, that is, in using an evidence-based approach to assessing the usefulness of various theories of giftedness and in assessing the effects of various academic programs for gifted students. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

At the outset of the chapter, it is pointed out that the concepts of gifts and talents have their origins in mythology, theology, and metaphysics. The main reason for their adoption into science was the compulsion to find explanatory concepts for the phenomenon that some persons attain a level of efficiency in a specific domain that normally cannot be achieved, even with extreme learning efforts and the best of support. To explain this phenomenon, the Actiotope Model of Giftedness places the focus on the actions of an individual and their evolution. The development of excellence is understood as an adaptation of a dynamic system, which intensifies in complexity through interactions with the objective structure of a domain, whereby with increasing excellence, the individual will also increasingly effect changes in the objective structure of the domain itself. This chapter also considers the coadaptation and coevolution of the components of the Actiotope, such as the action repertoire and its determinants, goals, subjective action space, and environment, as well as the interaction of these components within a network. Gifts and talents, which are traditionally understood as attributes of an individual, therefore, have several mothers and fathers. It is now time to recognize them by their true names. It is also time to give their talented children the chance to attain excellence by providing them with an individually tailored promotion of their entire Actiotope. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: create)

This chapter looks at how conceptions of giftedness can change lives. The major obstructions to the realization of gifted potential are socioeducational, and they exist everywhere in the world in different forms. They can be summed up in just three powerful and overlapping aspects: (1) morality, (2) gender, and (3) emotion. These aspects are discussed in detail in this chapter, along with international differences in conceptions of giftedness, and the fact that strong pressure to conform to expectations--positive or negative--affects the gifted one's life paths for decades. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: create)

This chapter looks at the Differentiated Model of Giftedness and Talent (DMGT) as a developmental model of giftedness and talent. Along with giftedness and talent, the DMGT introduces four components (see Figure 7.1) that help represent more accurately the complexity of the talent development process: intrapersonal catalysts (1C), environmental catalysts (EC), learning and practicing (LP), and chance (C). Moreover, as stated in the formal definitions previously mentioned, precise thresholds quantify the meaning of "outstanding." Finally, the DMGT discusses the long-term process of talent development, proposing various dynamic interactions among the six components. The present overview is structured around the three themes previously identified: (a) the six components, (b) the prevalence issue, and (c) the dynamics of talent development. In the final section, the author briefly highlight the main differences between the DMGT and other well-known conceptions of giftedness. The second part of this chapter succinctly covers two major questions (see Gagné, 2003b, for an extended discussion). First, what relationships do the six components of the DMGT entertain among themselves? Second, is it possible to create a hierarchy of the five factors in terms of their relative causal power? In other words, where lies the difference between those who become talented and those who do not? (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: create)

Giftedness, talent, expertise, and creative achievement are inextricably linked concepts. As we seek to understand the development of abilities in youth and the rise to high-level achievement in adulthood, these concepts may guide our efforts to nurture and establish conditions for their full fruition. The purpose of this chapter, then, is to examine the basic nature of giftedness, talent, expertise, and creative achievement and their interrelationships as they affect and guide the education of gifted and talented youth and to delineate guidelines for the development of high-level and creative achievement in adulthood. What genetic potentials and facilitative conditions combine and interact to produce expertise and/or high-level creative achievement? From exhaustive study of the lives of creative achievers, Gardner (1993) and Simonton (1997) offer some insights based on in-depth analysis of the lives of high-level, creative achievers. At first one is struck by the diversity among very high achievers: staid Albert Einstein, flamboyant Picasso, isolated Georgia O'Keefe, scholarly Darwin, and adventurous Ernest Hemingway! Are there common characteristics that might account for their genius or serve as predictors of creative achievement? Or are they too unique as examples of high-level achievement? Insights derived from research on the lives of great achievers are examined later in this chapter. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: create)

In this chapter, the author provides a description of the major theoretical issues underlying various conceptions of giftedness, an overview of the three-ring conception of giftedness, some of the research that led to the initial development of the theory, and a brief description of research carried out in places that have used this model. Also included are a new dimension of the overall theory that deals with co-cognitive characteristics and a brief description of a plan for identifying students for special programs and services based on this conception of giftedness. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: create)

This chapter outlines a view of creativity that pinpoints a mechanism that underlies all creative work, including that of children and adults, and that allows objective study and assessment. It is grounded in existing theories of lifespan development, and it translates easily to practice. Examples of such practices are discussed throughout this chapter. This chapter also compares this theory of creative giftedness with other existing theories. We will see that there are both points of agreement and points of disagreement. First, the mechanism underlying original and creative activity is described. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: create)

The WICS model is a possible common basis for identifying gifted individuals (Sternberg, 2003c). WICS is an acronym standing for Wisdom, Intelligence, Creativity, Synthesized. According to this model, wisdom, intelligence, and creativity are sine qua nons for the gifted leaders of the future. Without a synthesis of these three attributes, someone can be a decent contributor to society, and perhaps even a good one, but never a great one. In the remainder of this chapter, each of these attributes is discussed, although for didactic purposes, they are not discussed in the order in which they are stated in the acronym. The discussion starts with intelligence, which is a basis for creativity and wisdom and so should be discussed first. Then, creativity is discussed, which is essential in wisdom, as well. Finally, wisdom is discussed, which builds on but goes beyond intelligence and creativity. Then, methods are described for measuring the attributes. Finally, some general conclusions are drawn. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: create)

This chapter looks at a psychometric approach to the definition of academic giftedness. A historical overview of the scientific study of giftedness is given, and assessment of ability and achievement in terms of readiness is discussed. The author also explains the predictive usefulness of psychometric information, and why a psychometric definition of giftedness can be imperfect. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: create)

Conceptions of giftedness that focus on domain-specific considerations hold the most promise for promoting talent development in individuals at all stages of development because of the capacity to make appropriate correspondences between aptitudes and interventions, between predispositions and interests, and between the life of the mind and creating a life in the real world. Although general intelligence thresholds matter in real-world and school-based problem-solving situations, the level of g necessary to function at very high levels in specific domains remains debatable (Tannenbaum, 1996) and may depend greatly on a particular discipline or field (Jensen, 1998). This chapter explores the theories and applications of domain-specific giftedness as they have been articulated to date and analyzes how they differ from other conceptions of giftedness. The chapter concludes with applications of a domain-specific conception of giftedness to practice in the areas of identification, curriculum and instruction, and assessment in school and beyond. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: create)

In this chapter, the author outlines some of the potential complexities of giftedness and talent. His initial focus is on the innate, particularly genetic, features of giftedness. After scrutinizing the intricacies of genetic endowment, the author turns briefly to the role of the environment in converting potential giftedness into actual outstanding achievement. The chapter closes with a discussion of the more practical implications of this more complicated view of giftedness. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: create)

The research reviewed in this chapter highlights the complex choices made by talented girls and women as well as the belief that the outcomes of these choices are profound, both in the women's individual lives and for society at large. Over the last two decades, the author has studied talented girls and women from all domains across their life spans and have answered some questions, but introduced even more (Reis, 1987, 1995, 1998, 2001). The decision to identify this diverse group as talented or eminent rather than gifted stems from their collective preferences for these descriptors. Some of the complex reasons that fewer talented women with high potential achieve a high level of eminence and the characteristics of those who do are summarized in this chapter. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: create)

What is giftedness? My short answer to this question is that giftedness, in the context of the schools, is a chimera. But, because I am an academic, there is a predictably longer answer. I believe that the concept of the gifted student is incoherent and untenable on a number of grounds. The first of these is that the concept of the gifted child in American education is a social construct of questionable validity. The second is that educational practice predicated on the existence of the gifted child has been largely ineffective. The third is that this practice has exacerbated the inequitable allocation of educational resources in this country. I elaborate on each of these assertions in this section of the chapter. The fourth component of my thesis is that the construct of the gifted child is not necessary for, and perhaps is a barrier to, achieving the goals that brought this field into existence in the first place. In other words, I argue that we can, and should, have gifted education without gifted children. I discuss this in the following section in responding to another of the questions we were asked to address, "How should gifted individuals be instructed in school and elsewhere?" (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

The Study of Mathematically Precocious Youth (SMPY) was established at Johns Hopkins University in 1971 by Professor Julian Stanley to help youths who reason extremely well mathematically find the educational resources they need to achieve their full potential. After administering above-grade-level tests to identify students with advanced mathematical reasoning abilities, SMPY provided counseling and created programs to meet their academic needs. Eventually, university-based talent centers were established around the country to continue the practices SMPY pioneered. Because SMPY's methods for developing talent evolved over time in a very pragmatic way, that is, in response to the needs of individual students, the psychological and conceptual bases for this approach have not been especially emphasized in the literature. The first book-length report of SMPY's initial work was titled Mathematical Talent: Discovery, Description, and Development (Stanley et al., 1974). The three "D" words indicate the steps utilized by SMPY to find and serve talented youths. As a way to emphasize these steps, as well as the mathematical reasoning ability that the early talent searches involved, the book's title and this model of talent development was sometimes abbreviated to MT:D³. Later, a fourth D was added in acknowledgment of an increasingly important dimension: Dissemination of its principles, practices, and procedures. In this chapter, the conceptual and operational components of this model are summarized. It is meant to help youths who reason extremely well mathematically and/or verbally develop their talents. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: create)

In this chapter, the authors focus on extreme giftedness--individuals whose potential and/or achievement are several standard deviations above the norm. The authors focus their attention on children because they are interested in early signs of giftedness and in how such atypical children are best identified, assessed, and educated. Gifted children stand out in four striking ways. They are precocious in their domain of ability; they are passionate about and have a rage to master that domain; they think, learn, and solve problems in ways that are qualitatively different from typical children; and they are aware of being different from others. Those four ways are discussed, along with a number of ways to identify and evaluate giftedness, and educating extremely gifted students. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: create)

In this chapter, the authors have presented here a model of giftedness by referring to the specific domain of music. The model defines giftedness as a transitional process in which different characteristics contribute to the transformation of abilities into competencies and expertise and, in exceptional cases, into scholarly productivity or artistry. This transformation is made possible through the interaction of innate abilities and context, as specified at each stage. The authors have also outlined how they believe education can best facilitate the passage from abilities to competencies to expertise and scholarly productivity or artistry. They offer this model, based on research in the domain of music in the United States, as a useful framework for understanding, comparing, and nurturing talent development in other domains and other countries. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: create)