Su búsqueda

This essay offers six reasons why the field of gifted education should retire the terms giftedness and gifted. Additionally, in the historical context of longstanding, severe, and pervasive racial and income inequities in the field of gifted education, the term Master’s Discourse is introduced and defined in this call to change terminology. Among the reasons to move on from the gifted terminology are its racist history; its association with underrepresentation; waning support for gifted programming; years of debate in the field over the use of these terms; issues with giftedness being narrowly defined by ability tests; and the need for language to evolve. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

We investigated whether gifted students’ academic perfectionism is associated with their intellectual abilities or learned behaviors as they aim for achievement. Comparing four groups classified by achievement and intellectual ability among 443 Korean students, we examined the differential relations between gifted students and academic perfectionism by identification methods of giftedness. Using multigroup confirmatory factor analysis and multiple indicators multiple causes analysis, we found that students identified by their high intellectual ability were neither positive nor negative perfectionists. For high-achieving students, appropriate uses of perfectionistic self-regulation in academic settings were beneficial for their achievement. However, those students had a higher risk of depression when they lost control over their academic plans and behaviors, overwhelmed by their perfectionistic beliefs and excessive self-evaluations. The findings can be applied to the guidance and counseling for gifted students and underachieving students. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

In this dissertation, I sought to understand foster parents' perceptions of giftedness, how foster children's strengths, gifts, and talents affect their experiences and those of their foster parents, and what resources and information foster parents have for supporting their foster children's education and gifts. To understand these beliefs, I analyzed quantitative and qualitative survey data from 53 foster parents throughout the United States and analyzed interviews from 14 of those foster parents. Most foster parents surveyed perceived their foster children as a little or very different academically and in other ways than their peers not in foster care, and perceived they had different educational experiences than their peers, largely attributed to their lived experiences prior to entering and during foster care. Most participants felt their foster children's abilities, strengths, and talents affected foster parents a little or very much. Interviewed and surveyed foster parents defined giftedness as including the following attributes: academic achievement, natural ability or innate talent, intelligence, domain-specific capabilities, performance or skills above average for their age or above their peers, unique approaches to learning, and motivation for learning. Interviewees also addressed non-academic forms of giftedness, socioemotional characteristics of children with gifts and talents, and noted that these students may have some difficulties in school. Foster parents explained the adaptations they have made to their parenting because of their foster children's strengths, talents, and abilities, and highlighted the unique life experiences of foster children, which were not only hinderances but also could help them succeed academically and in life. Participants also expressed why they think foster children are not identified for gifted education programming. Foster parents had many needs related to their foster children's education and strengths, talents, and abilities. They made recommendations to those who train new foster parents and provide ongoing training to current foster parents; to schools and teachers of foster children; and to new foster parents about how to best meet the needs of foster children and encourage their gifts and talents. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved)

The purpose of this study is to understand achieving and underachieving honors students' perceptions and experiences of their talent development process. Students currently enrolled in the Honors College at research-intensive public university in the Midwest participated in this study. Gagné's Differentiated Model of Giftedness and Talent (DMGT, Gagné, 2009) was used as a conceptual framework with a sequential explanatory mixed methods research design. In the quantitative phase, the Academic Talent Development Factor Survey was redeveloped to measure honors students' perceptions and experiences of their academic talent development in terms of four components of DMGT: gifts, intrapersonal catalysts, environmental catalysts, and developmental process. A total of 174 honors students were assigned to two groups: achieving (n = 143) and underachieving (n = 31) groups. The redeveloped survey showed an acceptable model fit but should be improved to accomplish reasonable reliability and validity. The National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE, 2011) was used to determine whether honors students with underachievement are less exposed to good practices for undergraduate education (Chickering & Gamson, 1999) than their peers who maintain high academic performance.In the quantitative phase, discriminant analysis and chi-square test results did not yield appreciable differences in pre-college characteristics including gender, ethnicity, and SAT/ACT scores between two groups. In terms of four components of DMGT, discriminant analysis results revealed that developmental process, environmental catalysts, intrapersonal catalysts were statistically significant factors to determine differences between achieving and underachieving honors students in this study. Additionally, discriminant analysis results indicated that achieving and underachieving honors students showed high level of exposure to good practices. The differences between two groups were significant with good practices including (a) faculty interest in teaching and student development, (b) quality of non-classroom interaction with faculty, (c) academic challenge and effort, and (d) challenging classes and high faculty expectations.In the qualitative phase, in-depth interviews were conducted to investigate similar and different patterns between achieving and underachieving honors students. Interview data from eleven achieving students, four underachieving students, and three honors advisors/staff were analyzed. From the student interviews, four composite textural themes and four composite structural themes were identified. From the interviews with staff/advisors, four composite textural themes and four composite structural themes were identified. Qualitative analysis results supported the findings from the quantitative phase and provided detailed picture of participants' perceptions and experiences. Both achieving and underachieving students confirmed their natural ability but understood the importance of effort, task commitment. Honors students in the achieving group showed clear purpose of being honors students, focused on benefits, and anticipated opportunities in their academic talent development in the honors college Underachieving honors students did not share the same expectations. Honors students in the underachieving group viewed benefits as either unimportant or as additional work. Since few studies exist related specifically to the talent development process of honors students, this study adds to the literature and understanding of underachievement in honors college. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved)

In 1972, visual arts giftedness was recognized as an aspect of giftedness that needed to be nurtured and developed (Marland, 1972). However, students with gifts and talents in visual arts continued to be overlooked in the field of gifted education. Addressing these gaps in the field of gifted art education, I conducted a mixed methods study to examine the issues. The quantitative part of the study consisted of developing a survey instrument, Perceptions about Art Giftedness, and conducting an exploratory factor analysis (EFA) to investigate construct validity of the instrument. The initial instrument consisted of 23 items. Due to the focus of the study and the specificity of the survey, it was necessary to be selective in recruiting the participants. The inclusion criteria are: (a) they must be art teachers in an arts school or a public school that serves middle or high school grade levels; and/or (b) they must be teaching visual arts or fine arts. A total of 150 participants completed the survey. For the qualitative part of the study, I contacted the participants who completed the survey and asked if they were willing to be interviewed (n=11). Since this was an exploratory study, I began with the qualitative analysis. Three major themes were developed from the qualitative analysis: (a) attitudes and behaviors aligned with Art, (b) attitudes and behaviors aligned with giftedness, and (c) the participants' use of the selection process and the limitations. These themes highlighted how differently art teachers perceived visual art giftedness from the common understanding about giftedness and the importance of creative behaviors in art giftedness. Additionally, these art teachers also commented on the similarities between visual arts giftedness and conventional understanding of giftedness. They shared examples of characteristics, such as being self-directed and able to work independently that they observed among their gifted art students. From the quantitative analysis, the EFA results indicated a two-factor model with Factor 1 had a Cronbach's Alpha of .89 and Factor 2 has a Cronbach's Alpha of .91, suggesting that they were reliable estimates of the data's internal consistency. After examining the factor loading for the items, four items were eliminated due cross-loading and low communalities. Of the 19 items were retained, 10 items (.467 to .895) loaded onto Factor 1 and nine items (-.451 to -.937) loaded onto Factor 2. After examining the items for each of the factor and based on the results from the qualitative analysis, new descriptors were developed. Factor 1 (dispositions towards creative giftedness) consisted of items focusing the artistic attitudes and behaviors demonstrated by students who were gifted in visual arts. Factor 2 (dispositions towards conventional giftedness) contained items focusing on attitudes and behaviors that were traditionally associated with giftedness. In summation, results from qualitative and quantitative analysis helped to illustrate how participants were looking for characteristics in gifted visual arts students that goes beyond those highlighted by researchers in gifted education. The participants were not only focused on creative behaviors when identifying gifted art students, but they were also looking for conventional gifted characteristics; such as self-directedness, independence, and task commitment. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved)

Students with exceptional academic potential who come from low-income families are frequently not identified for and consequently are underrepresented in gifted and talented programs. Because of this, new means of identifying such children must be developed. This article presents the findings of exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses conducted on the HOPE Scale, a 13-item teacher-rating instrument designed to identify academic and social components of giftedness in elementary-aged students. Participants included 349 teachers who completed HOPE Scales on 5,995 ethnically and economically diverse students from three rural and two metropolitan school districts in the Midwest. Multigroup confirmatory factor analysis was also used to evaluate measurement invariance between income groups. Findings suggest a two-factor model represents good fit for the data while remaining loyal to the latent constructs of academic and social giftedness. Although showing some legitimate mean differences, invariance test results suggested equivalence of model form, factor loading, and factor variances across income groups. Putting the Research to Use: This research has important implications for practice. Frequently, traditional measures of achievement or aptitude under-identify children from low-income families. Concerns exist about the usefulness of teacher-ratings forms or scales in gifted and talented student identification. However, when given specific items or descriptors, teachers can provide useful information concerning student performance. The HOPE Scale provides items that teachers can use to rate specific social and academic behaviors of their students. Findings from this study revealed that teaches can effectively nominate low-income students for gifted programs. Further, items on the HOPE Scale were not biased against low-income students as rated by their teachers, meaning that the social and academic scales provided similar information concerning students in either income group. However, mean scores for student from low-income families on both scales were lower than their non-low income peers, providing evidence that instruments need to be normed on the specific groups for which their use is intended. Practitioners, should not shy away from using teacher nomination instruments, but they should consider the psychometric information available concerning the use of these instruments or rating forms as used with students in demographic groups of intended use. The HOPE Scale, as developed with indicated revisions, will provide educators and researchers with a simple, psychometrically sound instrument to help with identification of underrepresented student for gifted education services. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

Grouping used by teachers to address the diverse needs of their students and with aim to close the achievement gaps has become more popular recently and is one set of education strategies. Grouping can be used in schools to meet the needs of students with gifts and talents without incurring additional cost. However, grouping, and specifically, ability grouping, has been the subject of much and heated debate during the past three decades. Researchers from both sides of the ability grouping debate continue to discuss the pros and cons of its application in schools. As such, not all educators support the use of grouping, and further, not all forms of grouping strategies bring about the same results. For grouping strategies to appropriately meet the needs of students with gifts and talents, there are more factors to consider than simply putting students of similar levels of academic achievement together. Namely, curriculum and instruction has to be adjusted to accommodate the needs of these students, and care must be taken to ensure that other students receive appropriately enriched instruction and interesting curriculum so that they have a high-quality education that promotes academic growth and achievement. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 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)

In the fictional Harry Potter series, one of the tools in Harry’s arsenal against the evil Lord Voldermort is his cloak of invisibility. With this cloak, Harry is able to walk the halls of Hogwart’s School of Witchcraft and Wizardry unseen by those around him (Rowling, 1997). This phenomenon occurs daily in hallways and classrooms of schools all across the country, though not for the greater good, as twice-exceptional students’ gifts, and even their challenges, may go unrecognized by teachers, counselors, and administrators. Moon and Reis (2004) asserted that because it is outside the norm, giftedness is, by definition, exceptionality. For students to be considered twice exceptional, they must display characteristics associated with giftedness and with one or more learning or behavioral disorders (Baum & Olenchak, 2002; Baum, Olenchak, & Owen, 1998; Moon & Reis, 2004). Much like giftedness, varying definitions of twice-exceptionality exist. In 2009, a joint task force consisting of representatives from the National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented, the Association for the Education of Gifted Underachieving Students, and the Bridges Academy developed a comprehensive definition that encompassed the identification and servicing of this unique population. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)