Su búsqueda

This chapter pursues two main goals: (a) demonstrate that natural abilities—and their outstanding expression as gifts—really exist (the mainstream Pronat position), and that recent attacks by a few researchers who deny their existence (the Antinat position) can be easily parried empirically; (b) expose improper scholarly behavior by some Antinat researchers. Part I surveys the author's Differentiated Model of Giftedness and Talent (DMGT) and analyzes the concept of natural ability, pointing out its main defining characteristics. Then, it demonstrates with extensive empirical evidence that general intelligence meets all defining criteria of a natural ability. Part II illustrates how some influent Antinat researchers systematically exclude relevant evidence, accumulate irrelevant information, ignore crucial objections, and select from published studies only the results that support their position. These repeated instances of ethically improper scientific behavior show their lack of openness to an objective examination of all the available evidence and reassessment of their entrenched beliefs (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

In this chapter, the author dives deeply into the issue of misdiagnosis and presents evidence suggesting that ADHD-related characteristics, such as inattention, hyperactivity, and impulsivity, are not more common among high-ability children (focusing particularly on high-IQ children). Instead, the author argues that certain “overexcitabilities” are really the source of the issue and should not be conflated with traits and behaviors that look like ADHD. She also reviews the evidence on the link between high ability and the risk for developing a mental disorder and argues some best practices in the identification of high-ability students to determine both strengths and weaknesses for academic, social, and emotional planning. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: introduction)

The author discusses attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in this chapter. The author argues that educators should view ADHD through a new lens—as ADHG (attention divergent hyperactive gifted)—and he discusses the implications of this approach for educators as they create classrooms environments to foster creativity. The author believes that such a paradigm shift in our conceptualization of ADHD would shift the focus from remediation to the motivation, strengths, perseverance, and resilience that make students with ADHD so special. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: introduction)

The accusations in Gagné's (this volume) chapter are addressed and discussed. More importantly, this chapter describes the detailed differences between our two theoretical frameworks. Our theoretical framework is based on deliberate practice and focus on evidence that practice can dramatically influence the development of children, adolescents, and adults when the individuals engage in the designed practice for hours on a daily basis for months, years, and decades. In contrast, Gagné emphasizes the role of innate genetic differences and informal exercise. Once we accept the overwhelming evidence for genetic control of individual differences in height and body size, our empirical review has not uncovered rigorous scientific evidence that meets our standards and demonstrates conclusively that innate talent (gifts) are necessary for attaining expert performance. Based on the same standards, Gagné's anecdotal evidence from laypersons is rejected. The chapter concludes with an outline for how giftedness can be studied with the same rigorous scientific methods used for studying expert performance. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

First, "giftedness" is a label-nothing more. We are frequently asked whether such-and-such or so-and-so child is gifted. The answer depends on the criteria one sets. But there is no one absolute or "correct" set of criteria. Criteria for such labeling are a matter of opinion, nothing more, and there are many disagreements as to how the label should be applied. Second, the label can be applied in either a more general or a more specific way. The more general way implies that giftedness is relatively general across many domains--that is, someone is either gifted or not. On this view, someone who is gifted is gifted very broadly. The more specific way implies that giftedness is something that is potentially limited to one or several narrow domains-for example, verbal skills; or within the verbal domain, writing skills; or within the writing domain, fiction--writing skills. Indeed, relatively few successful fiction writers are also successful nonfiction writers, and vice versa. Third, conceptions of giftedness can and do change over time and place. At times in the past, a child's ability rapidly to learn classical Greek and Latin might be viewed as an important sign of giftedness. Today, such an ability generally would be relatively less valued. Similarly, the skills that lead a child to be labeled as gifted might be different in a hunting and gathering village in rural Tanzania than in urban Los Angeles. Fourth, conceptions of giftedness can be based on either explicit theories or implicit theories of giftedness. An explicit theory is one proposed by a scientist or educator who has studied giftedness and has arrived at a conception of giftedness that has been subject to some kind of empirical test. An implicit theory is simply a layperson's conception of a phenomenon. It has no explicit scientific basis. It might be looked at as a "pragmatic" conception rather than as one based on rigorous research. As we review conceptions of giftedness, keep in mind the four constraints above. The chapter does not provide final "answers," because there are no such answers. Rather, each reader will have to decide for him- or herself which conception or conceptions he or she finds to be compelling. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

The study of gifts and talents and how innate abilities interact with one's environment, personality, educational opportunities, family support, and life experiences has fascinated psychologists, educators, and parents for decades. Why is it that one child with remarkably high potential born into a particular family in a particular environment grows up to become a neurosurgeon while a child of similar intellectual potential who lives in the same community and attends the same schools, decides to drop out of high school? What have researchers and scholars learned in the last few decades about the nature of talent development and intellectual giftedness? In this chapter, these questions, none of which can be answered simply, are discussed and current research about intellectual giftedness is summarized. As the research points out, one of the core concepts that has emerged about intellectual giftedness in the last few decades relates to its diversity, for there is no more varied group of people than those labeled intellectually gifted. Despite this broad diversity, however, several common themes about intellectual giftedness and the conditions for its development exist. We begin our review of the research related to intellectual giftedness with a discussion of these themes, summarizing highlights about research on intellectual giftedness in the United States, including the seminal work of Lewis Terman, and presenting an overview of what we believe to be some interesting and potentially important American theories to date. We conclude the chapter with some interesting research-based trends related to new ideas in defining and developing academic gifts and talents. It is important to understand, however, that there is no agreed-upon consensus about who is gifted and no final answers about our evolving understandings of how intellectual giftedness develops and the characteristics that help us to identify and nurture intellectual gifts and talents. To introduce the challenge associated with both defining and identifying giftedness in students, four brief case studies are introduced in the first section of the chapter. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

In this chapter, the authors go beyond twice exceptional (2e) by taking into account the intersection of giftedness, disability, and cultural identities that can significantly shape the experience of students in school. The authors illustrate the importance of this intersection through a case study of a high-ability African American student with a learning disability, and they discuss the academic, personal/social, and career implications for bringing out the best in culturally diverse 2e students. The authors also offer practical solutions and strategies for teachers and school counselors to collaborate with families to promote the student success of 2e students with multiple identities. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: introduction)