Su búsqueda

Adolescence happens to gifted middle and high school students, just as it does to their nongifted peers. In fact, the adolescent period may be more prolonged among high ability youth, because their career goals may require a longer period of economic dependency during advanced schooling. How well do the conceptions of giftedness previously developed in the field of gifted education pertain to the adolescent years? Do we need conceptions of giftedness that focus specifically on adolescents? In this chapter, we provide a brief overview of the developmental tasks of adolescence. Then we review some of the conceptions of giftedness that have been developed by leaders in the field of gifted education and analyze their relevance to gifted adolescents. Finally, we offer a framework for gifted education at the secondary level that focuses on the developmental tasks facing high ability students during the adolescent period. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

In this chapter, research from the last two decades concerning gifted and talented male and female adolescents is summarized, with particular attention paid to how gender, giftedness, and adolescence interact. Current research is summarized about academically talented adolescents in areas such as test differences; abilities and beliefs about abilities; the effects of stereotyping; peer, parent, and teacher influences; and career choices. Some prior conclusions are reaffirmed, present contradictory research evidence is discussed; older findings are reviewed in light of new information; questions are raised about the importance, significance, and broader applicability of prior conclusions; and future research is suggested about the interaction of gender, adolescence, and giftedness. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

As with all decisions about programming or selecting curriculum for gifted students, the choices made at the secondary level should be internally consistent and consonant with beliefs about giftedness and the most appropriate goals for gifted students. While all of the program models offered at the secondary level are unique, they are all based on a belief that gifted students are unique in their learning characteristics and that the traditional or standard school curriculum as delivered in a lock-step fashion in the heterogeneous classroom is insufficient to meet the needs that arise from the distinguishing characteristics that these learners present. The ways in which the differences are defined and the suggested responses differ across models, although the models share some common attributes or assumptions that allow general categorization as either enrichment or acceleration models. This chapter discusses a variety of program models that have been developed and implemented at the secondary level. The most critical concern of all schools should be to evaluate the outcomes of the options that are offered. Current research does not clearly support any one of the available options as the best or most appropriate for the achievement of the goals we have outlined for successful education for gifted students. Clearly, differences in definitions of giftedness and beliefs about giftedness, as well as the expectations and meaning of success in any community will drive the goal-setting and evaluation processes. A clear evaluation plan that has been approved by the stakeholders in the education of gifted students will be the best test of whether or not a given set of options is successful in addressing the needs of these students. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

This chapter attempts to survey the scientific literature of the past few decades on the process of talent development in sports. We structure that overview around Gagné's (2003) Differentiated Model of Giftedness and Talent (DMGT). We examine separately the relevant literature associated with each of the DMGT's five causal components: (a) natural abilities or gifts, (b) the developmental process itself, (c) intrapersonal catalysts, (d) environmental catalysts, and (e) chance factors. This survey brought us to a crucial integrative question: What makes the difference between reaching and not reaching high levels of talent in sports? We had to acknowledge that there was not yet a very clear and final answer to that complex question, and that the best way to summarize the existing literature was to speak of complex interactions between the components, acting differently from one athlete to the next, and from one stage to the next in a sports career. Of what use can this chapter be to educators in schools? What suggestions can the field of sports offer to teachers of gifted and talented adolescents, and to the professionals and school administrators responsible for planning, funding, and implementing enrichment programs in the school system? Two major observations come to mind. First, it seems clear that the vast majority of trainers and coaches in sports readily recognize the large breadth of individual differences in natural physical abilities. The second observation concerns the way professionals in sports foster the talent development process. Two key concepts could summarize typical programming activities in sports: ability grouping and accelerative enrichment. Implications of these observations are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

This chapter begins by providing a brief historical overview of giftedness, with an emphasis on identifying the major figures in the field. The theoretical formulation of intelligence and the conceptual links between intelligence and giftedness are also discussed from a historical perspective. The evolution of multitrait theories of intelligence, the impact of advances in psychometrics on gifted assessment, and the increase in the number of theory-based cognitive measures are examined. A major portion of the chapter focuses on discussing special issues related to the intellectual assessment of gifted children. The importance of considering the theoretical differences among intelligence measures, and the importance of using theory-based measures, are discussed. The chapter concludes with specific recommendations on the effective use of intelligence measures in the identification of giftedness. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

It is easy to assume that gifted students will be successful at school, because--by definition--they learn and understand things more quickly and more easily than their age-mates do. But, school accomplishment is no guarantee; motivation plays a critical role in success. Because motivation is so complex, there are various routes to enhance or stifle it, and teachers, parents, and peers travel many of those routes. In this chapter we focus on understanding gifted students' motivation, and address what others can do to promote these students' adaptive motivation, with an emphasis on the middle- and high-school grades. We take the approach that gifted adolescents are characterized by high ability in one or more areas of human endeavor, but vary dramatically in their motivational profiles, showing patterns of motivation that range from optimal to maladaptive. This perspective allows us to consider underachieving gifted students who exhibit maladaptive motivational patterns. It is also consistent with dynamic and incremental approaches to viewing giftedness. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

The term twice-exceptional refers to students who have or show potential for remarkable gifts and talents in specific areas, but whose deficits and difficulties in learning, paying attention, or meeting social and emotional expectations impede their development. For too many practitioners, however, the terms deficits and giftedness are incompatible, therefore being twice-exceptional is an impossible phenomenon. In fact, many youngsters who are bright, but who have been diagnosed with some sort of disability are more likely to receive special education services than talent development opportunities. Likewise some gifted students use their talents to mask their learning difficulties and struggle in school to compensate for undiagnosed problems, thus obscuring their need for special education support. Twice-exceptional students have a unique set of academic, social, and emotional needs. The very dichotomy of abilities and disabilities that comprise their dual diagnosis sets them apart from their peers who are identified as gifted and from those who receive special education services. In fact, twice-exceptional students require dual differentiation in order to meet their often-contradictory sets of needs. This chapter discusses these unique needs and describes how developmental needs of adolescence exacerbate the issues. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

This chapter discusses the theoretical formulation of intelligence and the conceptual links between intelligence and giftedness from a historical perspective. It examines the evolution of multitrait theories of intelligence, the impact of advances in psychometrics on gifted assessment, and the increase in the number of theory-based cognitive measures. The chapter describes the refinement of theory of intelligence centering on the Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) model. It emphasizes the need for a better understanding of the relationships between screening procedures and the final decision outcomes based on intelligence tests. The chapter provides an extensive review of factor-analytic research, and explores the multidimensional abilities of gifted children with commonly used measures of intelligence. A major issue in identification of gifted students relates to the representation of minority students in gifted programs. Alternative approaches are provided for identifying gifted children with learning disabilities. English-language learners are underrepresented in programs that serve gifted students. The use of a single cognitive test composite score as the primary criterion for determining giftedness is highly common within schools. One of the crucial decisions made by any school system is where to set the intelligence quotient (IQ) "cutoff" score. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

This chapter begins by providing a brief historical overview of giftedness, with an emphasis on identifying the major figures in the field. The theoretical formulation of intelligence and the conceptual links between intelligence and giftedness ate also discussed from a historical perspective. The evolution of multi trait theories of intelligence, the impact of advances in psychometrics on gifted assessment, and the increase in the number of theory-based cognitive measures are examined. The refinement of theory of intelligence centering on the Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) model is discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

The present study sought to examine the perceptions of giftedness and identification procedures held by experienced teachers of gifted minority students. Twenty-seven 4th-grade teachers of gifted students in an urban school system with a high representation of minority and economically disadvantaged students were surveyed. Results indicated that experienced teachers still held a narrow conception of giftedness and were not aware of how culture and environmental factors may influence the expression of giftedness in minority and economically disadvantaged students. Findings also indicated that these teachers expressed concerns for approximately one third of their students qualifying for the gifted program. These concerns were based primarily on students having a skill deficit in one area, poor work habits, or behavioral or family problems. Teachers were less likely to notice gifted characteristics in these students compared to other identified students, even though both groups were identified in the same way. Implications for teaching gifted minority and economically disadvantaged students are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)