Su búsqueda

This chapter is written from the stance of a practitioner researching his own practice as an educator in the field of giftedness. I describe how a model of gift-creation has emerged through critical responsiveness to my own practice, and I offer a parallel description of the conditions under which gifts can be grown, rather than identified. These descriptions underlie an argument for shifting professional focus from dominant twentieth-century Western rationalist approaches to the field of gifted and talented education, with their deterministic, dualistic, individualistic, pragmatic, tool-for-result, and knowing-centered associations, towards a concept of giftedness which is co-constructed (not identified) in a social, relationally respectful, activity-oriented, dialectical, tool-and-result manner and context. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

This chapter surveys the Differentiated Model of Giftedness and Talent (DMGT), a talent development theory whereby outstanding natural abilities, or gifts, are progressively transformed into outstanding systematically developed skills and knowledge, which define expertise or talent in a specific occupational field. The text briefly describes complex interactions among the six components that help or hinder that process, and succinctly answers a fundamental question: 'What factor(s) differentiate(s), on average, between those who emerge among the talented and those who remain average?' The field of gifted education defines its special population around two key concepts: giftedness and talent. For the vast majority of scholars, these two terms are considered synonyms. Yet, these same scholars keep mentioning one particular idea in almost every discussion of the giftedness construct, namely a distinction—implicit or explicit—between early emerging forms of giftedness, to some extent innate and usually manifested in childhood, and fully developed, adult forms of 'giftedness'. The distinction will be expressed with terms like potential versus achievement, aptitude versus realization, promise versus fulfillment. But it will rarely, if ever, systematically be operationalized. I believe it can be done. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

The author describes how she uses the inclusive, cross-curricular model called Thinking Actively in a Social Context (TASC; see record 2008-17742-035), among other tools, in her work to support children in developing their own giftedness, and schools in providing inclusive and inclusional gifted education provisions. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: book)

There are many controversies, conflicting research findings and widely-held misconceptions about psychosocial development as it intersects with giftedness. The author argues here that although advanced academic ability may be correlated with higher scores on tests of moral reasoning, it does not necessarily lead to more moral behavior. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: book)

The focus of this chapter concerns the introduction of a set of assessment tools for both teachers and students to use in conjunction with their workload, which reflects and raises awareness of real creative effort taking place. It is my contention also that decisions about the value of creative effort should initially be made more to inform the creator than for the purposes of identifying the gifted. This primary focus may stimulate further excellence and identify areas of future learning over which the creator or facilitator has some control. Bringing students explicitly into assessment priorities can be highly productive in this process. The secondary aspect of such feedback is to facilitate the identification of giftedness, providing information that helps identify those students who are so advanced relative to their age peers such that they require adaptations to instruction. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

In this chapter the current empirical research on morality and giftedness is reviewed with an emphasis on ethical sensitivity. The component of moral judgment has been the most studied aspect in morality. Although high ability students have been shown to be superior in moral judgment when compared to average ability students, morality includes other components as well, such as sensitivity, motivation, and character. In this chapter the component of ethical sensitivity is introduced with both quantitative and qualitative empirical results regarding gifted students. Recommendations for the moral education of gifted students are made based on the research findings. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

Grounded in her experience as a student and as an experienced educator, the author advocates that educators attend to motivational and other psychosocial factors in all students, observing that giftedness develops when students experience their educational challenges as interesting, relevant, and achievable. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: book)

The author writes about findings from his survey and interviews with over 800 gifted and talented education coordinators throughout England, and about the problems that are caused in practice by their confusion over foundational principles, including definitions of terms. He argues for the importance of a developmental, practical definition that embodies an understanding of the dynamic nature of giftedness, and leads directly to effective implications for educators. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: book)

Global Success (GS) is a complex reflection of personal excellence, achieved as a result of tackling challenges. The GS concept has been built from a holistic perspective, and considers the multitude of forms that an individual's personal successes might take. GS addresses the complex linkage of each form to all other forms of personal success at a certain moment of an individual's life. The global interaction among all these forms of success affects each of the various aspects of every human being. GS, as a developing theory, suggests that the identification and multi-dimensional analysis of one's personal values, or axiological system, from a lifespan perspective, is important for understanding the interrelationship between success and giftedness. Usually, the concept of success is perceived as a sociological construct and is understood more as an outcome than as a dynamic developmental process. I think that global success involves many more dimensions than is captured in the usual social, external connotations of success. I propose that it be understood as incorporating a person's entire life construction. Also, we consider the impact of GS on what giftedness means from a gifted individual's point of view. In order to achieve a better understanding of the significance of personal global success to real-life contexts, such as the learning experience for gifted students in schools, we refer to current psychological theories of learning, and to curriculum models. We also recommend the development of life-long educational strategies to improve global success. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

After reviewing literature on Asperger syndrome, the author describes in some detail a case study of a child who has been diagnosed with Asperger's and shows evidence of giftedness. In a consideration of educational implications of this kind of dual exceptionality, she emphasizes the importance of attending to strengths and interests, as vehicles for learning to cope with challenges. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: book)

(An earlier version of this chapter appears in K. Tirri and M. Ubani [eds.] [2007], Holistic Education and Giftedness.) In developed countries, education, like medical provision, is a key focus of social welfare. Recent years have seen a tendency to compare education to medicine in the call for evidence-based policy and practice (Hargreaves 1996; Slavin 2002). The problematical aspects of this are significant and have been explored elsewhere (Parlett and Hamilton 1987; Thomas 2004). In this chapter, I suggest an area for more fruitful comparison between the two domains: a consideration of how the ethical principles informing the medical profession might shed light on the ethics of gifted education. Since the time of Hippocrates, medical practitioners have been concerned to ground their activities in a set of ethical principles that govern the doctor-patient relationship and reflect wider conceptions of a good society. These principles may be grouped into four key areas: respect for autonomy, beneficence, non-malfeasance (doing no harm) and justice. I consider here the extent to which these principles overlap with and might inform the ethics of gifted education. In particular, I seek to identify and explore key ethical issues and tensions in gifted education related to them, including respect for autonomy—consent and the right to underachieve; beneficence—what good is done by gifted education, and to whom; non-malfeasance—the character and competing claims of potential harms to gifted students and others; and justice—equal rights for giftedness as a special educational need, distributive justice, and parity of esteem. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

This chapter reports on the outcomes of a three-year project, commissioned by the British government, involving fourteen local education districts drawn from a range of socioeconomic settings. The project was carried out as a set of action research projects, with practitioners working collaboratively with university academics, exploring practical strategies for enhancing educational provision for gifted children aged 4 to 7. Each project was designed to address the local schools' and education districts' needs within the context of a rapidly developing national agenda for gifted and talented education in the UK. Analysis of the fourteen case studies generated a number of issues with implications for classroom practice and policy. The findings from the projects enrich and extend the knowledge base and understanding of gifted and talented education in foundation and key stage one settings (4 to 7 years) in England and Wales. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

There is considerable evidence that intelligence as a brain function occurs through the synchronized integration of information processing, involving a myriad of interconnected functional modules. Consistently, the brains of gifted children show relatively higher levels of cerebral interconnectivity when engaged in cognitive tasks. An important part of the evidence for integrated brain function as the seat of intelligence comes from studies into cross-modal processing, where sensory information in one modality, e.g. vision, is processed in multiple sensory areas, e.g. auditory, sensory. Thus, so-called learning styles such as VAK (Visual-Auditory-Kinesthetic) based on processing information in a single modality, fail to acknowledge how the brain actually works. This could explain why no independent evidence has been found for the learning efficacy of VAK and similar learning style inventories. Moreover, as an anti-integration pedagogy, VAK is implicitly anti-intellectual and anti-giftedness. Savants are an intriguing example of high-functioning individuals. Despite their extremes of performance, this chapter argues that in terms of their neural interconnectivity, the brains of savants are qualitatively different from those of children we usually classify as gifted. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

What will be the turning points in the education of gifted and talented students in the next several decades? As we complete the first decade of the new century, it is appropriate to reflect on the extraordinary changes and advances that have occurred in the last several decades in our field. Consensus on the turning points of the past century may be difficult to reach and admittedly, this perspective is filtered through the lens of one American woman who has spent the majority of her professional life in this area. The turning points suggested as a focus for the next several decades include the following: (1) expanding conceptions of the multidimensionality of giftedness and talent development, (2) eradicating the continued absence of challenge for gifted and talented students, (3) making a difference for underserved populations, (4) changing our focus from ways to identify gifted students to the ways we develop gifts and talents, and finally, (5) applying 'gifted' education pedagogy to talent development, with a focus on strengths, not deficits. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

Human beings usually live a long time. During their lifetime, certain attributes will follow them from birth to death. The question that has preoccupied me for more than 30 years is where giftedness falls along this dimension. Is giftedness confined to childhood and perhaps adolescence? Or can it be like gender—something that we possess from the moment of conception and which remains with us until the day we die? The attribution of giftedness appears to be a curvilinear inverted-U function of the person's age since conception, with the peak in childhood. Yet I would argue that the actual distribution should be more egalitarian. A gifted child was probably a gifted infant, even zygote, and may later become a gifted adolescent and adult, and may even die being gifted. The only difference across the life span is changes may take place in the nature of the gift or in the degree of its manifestation. To make this case I will offer a brief review of what we know about giftedness from a lifespan developmental perspective. The review starts with conception to birth, turns to childhood through adolescence, and ends with adulthood and maturity. The overview will stress giftedness of the highest order, giftedness that leads to exceptional achievement. In order words, the gift that the individual received eventually creates gifts that are given to others. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

(This chapter takes the form of an interview with Carol Dweck about her and her graduate and post-doctoral students' current work, especially as this relates to the field of giftedness. Conducted by Susan Veronikas and Michael F. Shaughnessy, the interview was first published in Gifted Education International 19, 2004, 27-33 and has been updated by Carol Dweck for this volume.) The author describes her research on the malleability of intelligence, and the important effect that mindsets can have on intellectual and academic functioning and success, demonstrating that intelligence, creativity, and giftedness are not the fixed traits that much historical work in the field assumes. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: book)

The author has been a strong advocate of evidence-based approaches to gifted education and counseling for many years now, and describes in this chapter the state of affairs in Germany. He makes a compelling case for systematic program evaluation, as well as serious attention to teacher and counselor training in gifted development that every jurisdiction would do well to heed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: book)

The author illustrates the importance of honoring cultural differences as they lead to different conceptions and experiences of what giftedness is, how it develops and how it is best fostered. His chapter on lay conceptions of gifted education in China provides a window on the kinds of fresh conceptions that can be useful to educators and psychologists everywhere. He concludes his chapter and this thematic section by discussing the Chinese practice of ren (benevolence), suggesting the integration of a socio-emotional component into gifted education by fostering the self-cultivation that transforms and changes one's beliefs, attitudes, and values, and leads to a deep concern for the well-being of others. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: book)

Giftedness is, in large part, a function of creativity in generating ideas, analytical intelligence in evaluating the quality of these ideas, practical intelligence in implementing the ideas and convincing others to value and follow the ideas, and wisdom to ensure that the decisions and their implementation is for the common good of all stakeholders. The model is referred to as WICS—wisdom, intelligence, creativity, synthesized—although the order of elements in the acronym is intended only to make it pronounceable. This chapter considers the elements of creativity, intelligence and wisdom, in that order, because it represents the order in which the elements often are initially used. As gifted performance evolves, however, the elements become interactive and so order becomes less relevant. The chapter then considers how the concepts can be employed in teaching and assessment, and finally, how they can be employed in identifying the gifted. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

This chapter addresses the issue of whether the dominant conception of 'gifted and talented' is justified by psychological research, and what effects holding this conception have for learners. It argues that both the research base and practical and moral considerations should lead us to exclude ideas of innate and unchangeable degrees of 'giftedness' from our educational practice as incorrect, inhuman and counter-productive. It is easy to forget that 'brightness' or 'giftedness' are inferences and attributions, not statements of self-evident fact. In this chapter we want to go back to the behaviors and dispositions on which these inferences and attributions are based and explore the ways in which they might have been learned, and thus could be subject to further systematic modification. We ask: To what extent do young people learn to act in ways that will lead parents and teachers to attribute 'brightness' to them? To what extent are such behaviors capable of further modification? (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)