Su búsqueda

Questionnaires were given to students prior to testing for giftedness to assess how the gifted identification process changes attitudes to ward gifted programs and parent-child relationships. After those identified as gifted had been participating in a pullout gifted program for one semester, another questionnaire was administered to all original participants. Comparable data were also collected from the students' parents. Results suggest that prior to identification, gifted and nongifted students and their parents shared similar attitudes toward giftedness. After identification, attitudes showed either no change or decreased. Compared to their gifted counterparts, nongifted students and their parents tended to report lower attitudes after identification. The impact of this attenuation and the use of preidentification data are also discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2017 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

In response to concerns about the credibility of many published research findings, open science reforms such as preregistration, data sharing, and alternative forms of publication are being increasingly adopted across scientific communities. Although journals on giftedness and advanced academic research have already implemented several of these practices, they remain unfamiliar to some researchers. In this informal conversation, Kendal Smith and Matthew Makel discuss how they came to know and use open science practices, the values of open science, benefits and objections, and their future aspirations for open science practices in gifted education research. Their conversation aims to help make open science practices more understandable and actionable for both early career and established researchers. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

We were thrilled to see an article focusing on giftedness, written by such thoughtful and well-respected researchers as Subotnik, Olszewski-Kubilius, and Worrell (see record 2012-24309-002). The expansive scope of their synthesis is so impressive that it could serve as a crash course introduction to gifted education. In our commentary, we focus specifically on the perspective of education service delivery. From this perspective, we review their guiding principles, chief goal, and provide some follow-up questions for further clarification as well as an implementation option also based on talent development. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)

This chapter briefly outlines the history of research on expertise and provides examples of research merging the views of giftedness and expertise. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

Creativity is arguably among the most important--yet least understood--psychological constructs. Creativity is often conceptualized as an engine of economic development as well as the impetus behind technological advances, workplace leadership, and life success (see Amabile, 1998; Davila, Epstein, & Shelton, 2006; Kappel & Rubenstein, 1999; Stevens & Burley, 1999; Tierney, Farmer, & Graen, 1999; Torrance, 1981a). Florida (2002,2005) goes so far as to make a strong case that the American economy is, in fact, a "Creative Economy." Of course, creativity's virtues extend beyond economic benefits. The recent rise in popularity of positive psychology, with its shift in emphasis from pathology to prevention and personal strengths, has focused attention on the use of creativity and creative development as paths to improve the human condition. For example, creativity has been associated with maintaining healthy, loving relationships (Livingston, 1999), effective therapy (Kendall, Chu, Gifford, Hayes, & Nauta, 1998), learning to resolve conflicts effectively (Webb, 1995), combat grief (Davis, 1989), and even the use of humor to defuse potentially violent circumstances (Jurcova, 1998). With such a diverse array of effects, one might presume an abundance of attention and funds have been spent researching creativity. However, Sternberg and Lubart (1996) concluded that psychology researchers have committed far too few resources toward creativity given its importance to the field and the world, and the situation appears to have changed little since their observations a decade ago. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

Current practices in study design and data analysis have led to low reproducibility and replicability of findings in fields such as psychology, medicine, biology, and economics. Because gifted education research relies on the same underlying statistical and sociological paradigms, it is likely that it too suffers from these problems. This article discusses the origin of the poor replicability and introduces a set of open science practices that can increase the rigor and trustworthiness of gifted education’s scientific findings: preregistration, open data and open materials, registered reports, and preprints. Readers are directed to Internet resources for facilitating open science. To model these practices, a pre peer-review preprint of this article is available at https://psyarxiv.com/nhuv3/. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

Reports an error in "Gifted students’ perceptions of an accelerated summer program and social support" by Seon-Young Lee, Paula Olszewski-Kubilius, Matthew C. Makel and Martha Putallaz ( Gifted Child Quarterly, 2015[Oct], Vol 59[4], 265-282). The original article should have included the following acknowledgment: The authors would like to acknowledge the contributions of Corinne Alfeld and Becky Prince Kennedy to this study, particularly for their assistance with developing the survey and data collection. (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 2015-43792-005). Using survey responses from students who participated in the summer programs at two university-based gifted education institutions, this study examined changes in gifted students’ perceptions of their learning environments, accelerated summer programs and regular schools, and social support in lives after participation in the summer programs. Our sample of gifted students was generally favorable about their classroom experiences and interactions with their teachers both in the gifted programs and regular school classes. Some noticeable differences were greater acceptance and support for giftedness, a stronger connection to peers, and greater ease in peer relationships reported during the programs, and enhanced maturity and orientation toward future after the programs. While all students relied on family and peers as sources of social support before, during and after the summer programs, older students also endorsed being able to rely more on themselves. Perceptions of greater social support seemed to be related to more positive assessment of students’ summer and school classes, although causality can go in either direction. Overall, this study suggests that gifted students’ summer program experiences may be instrumental in receiving affirmation about their giftedness from peers, enhancing independence and maturity for academic life, and building stronger belief in themselves. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved)

[Correction Notice: An Erratum for this article was reported in Vol 60(1) of Gifted Child Quarterly (see record 2016-01130-006). The original article should have included the following acknowledgment: The authors would like to acknowledge the contributions of Corinne Alfeld and Becky Prince Kennedy to this study, particularly for their assistance with developing the survey and data collection.] Using survey responses from students who participated in the summer programs at two university-based gifted education institutions, this study examined changes in gifted students’ perceptions of their learning environments, accelerated summer programs and regular schools, and social support in lives after participation in the summer programs. Our sample of gifted students was generally favorable about their classroom experiences and interactions with their teachers both in the gifted programs and regular school classes. Some noticeable differences were greater acceptance and support for giftedness, a stronger connection to peers, and greater ease in peer relationships reported during the programs, and enhanced maturity and orientation toward future after the programs. While all students relied on family and peers as sources of social support before, during and after the summer programs, older students also endorsed being able to rely more on themselves. Perceptions of greater social support seemed to be related to more positive assessment of students’ summer and school classes, although causality can go in either direction. Overall, this study suggests that gifted students’ summer program experiences may be instrumental in receiving affirmation about their giftedness from peers, enhancing independence and maturity for academic life, and building stronger belief in themselves. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

In this chapter, the integrative model of talent development (IMTD), and especially its differentiating model of giftedness and talent (DMGT) component, will serve as the conceptual framework to answer the five following questions: (1) How does the DMGT distinguish gifts from talents? (2) How does the DMGT describe the talent development process? (3) Where do gifts come from; are they innate? (4) How can we best foster academic talent development? (5) What makes the DMGT/IMTD unique? (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

Gifted people have a special responsibility to use their talent to participate in finding out novel solutions to the challenges of our century. This chapter focuses on the practices of talent support actions that may foster contemplation, creative; deep thinking; and deliberative discussions of gifted people. Importantly, the chapter links these practices to the development of wisdom, as an emergent property of mind that can be obtained by the successful integration of life experiences, where success means a balanced, impartial, and independent life and is guided by universal love—as explained in the next section. Summarizing three case studies of talent support programs, this chapter shows that developing deep thinking and wisdom is an important, but heretofore not well-developed, aspect of gifted education. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

Athletic talent development typically follows a similar path (often conceptualized as a pyramid) regardless of the sport of interest. At the base, we find children engaged in play or recreation, with local clubs and high school sports typically forming the next level. Some young athletes are identified for entry into elite programs, such as traveling teams or Olympic development programs. From there, athletes join regional or college teams. Next may come a pre-elite level. Finally, the tip of the pyramid is the elite level comprised of professional and Olympic athletes. To understand effective talent development, it is important to first take a critical look at this traditional pathway. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

Existing research practices in gifted education have many areas for potential improvement so that they can provide useful, generalizable evidence to various stakeholders. In this article, we first review the field’s current research practices and consider the quality and utility of its research findings. Next, we discuss how open science practices increase the transparency of research so readers can more effectively evaluate its validity. Third, we introduce five large-scale collaborative research models that are being used in other fields and discuss how they could be implemented in gifted education research. Finally, we review potential challenges and limitations to implementing collaborative research models in gifted education. We believe greater use of large-scale collaboration will help the field overcome some of its methodological challenges to help provide more precise and accurate information about gifted education. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

Unfortunately, an approach to talent identification that suggests that individuals either are or are not gifted fails to recognize the complex nature of cognitive abilities and the many factors that influence the development of those abilities in children and adolescents. Although talent search programs do require certain scores for eligibility for their programs, the purpose of the talent search assessment is not to determine who is gifted, but to provide insight into students’ abilities so that academic needs can be met in school and elsewhere through appropriate programmatic options. There is much in this approach to talent identification and development that schools might replicate as they seek to address the needs of students who exhibit advanced academic abilities and/or achievement. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

An unfortunate feature of much research is the tendency to attract attention—such as increased citations—by advocating extreme positions on difficult questions, the nature-nurture issue decidedly among them. The downside of this practice for our understanding of giftedness is that the complex interactions between genetic and environmental factors tend to get overlooked. Worse yet, in minimizing the function of one or the other side of the debate, proponents of single-factor explanations tend to vastly oversimplify the supposed operation of the neglected factor. That oversimplification is certainly apparent in the advocates of deliberate practice as the sole factor in talent development—a point that I wish to elaborate in this chapter. As will be seen below, the genetics of genius, talent, or giftedness is far more complex and nuanced than these extremists realize. I begin by showing that any innate gift or talent for a given domain must be defined in terms of deliberate practice for the definition to feature any scientific validity. I then focus specifically on the genetics side of the foregoing demonstration, showing that nature most likely operates in a far more complex and dynamic manner than often realized. A gift or talent does not work anything like the inheritance of eye color or even height. After these two arguments are presented, I close by discussing some implications for practice. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

Growing attention is being paid to individuals’ implicit beliefs about the nature of intelligence. However, implicit beliefs about giftedness are currently underexamined. In the current study, we examined academically gifted adolescents’ implicit beliefs about both intelligence and giftedness. Overall, participants’ implicit beliefs about giftedness and intelligence were significantly positively correlated while also having statistically significant mean differences, suggesting that they perceived the nature of the two constructs differently. Specifically, many students viewed intelligence as malleable (incremental view) and giftedness as fixed (entity view), whereas very few students viewed giftedness as malleable and intelligence as fixed; however, heterogeneity was observed. The beliefs identified in the current study provide important insight into the domain-specific nature of implicit beliefs of gifted students and suggest that caution be used against using terms like giftedness and intelligence interchangeably. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 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)

Paula has been teaching for more than 30 years at a school specializing in gifted education. She loves working with her students, who are quick and dedicated learners. In 2016, the school was taken over by a new consortium, which decided to adopt a more contemporary school approach to replace the existing one that had been in force for more than 30 years. The consortium appointed Paula to put together an Innovation Team to oversee the transition to the new structure. Paula happily accepted. In this chapter, we will report Paula's initial thought processes. She was fully cognizant that the efficiency and success of the Innovation Team would depend on the quality of her preparatory work. Along with carefully monitoring and analyzing her school and conducting a thorough examination of the relevant literature, she also consulted several experts from various backgrounds. These included experts in gifted education (representatives from other gifted schools and researchers), experts in administration and governance, parents of gifted students, and organizational psychologists and sociologists. She also consulted specialists, such as the program director of a mentoring program and the head of a school specializing in self-regulated learning. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

Research concerning beliefs about the malleability of personal characteristics has recently turned to a focus on heterogeneity, including the exploration of moderators of intervention effectiveness and construct-specificity of implicit beliefs. This moving beyond a mean-level approach can provide insight into the differential types of implicit beliefs endorsed by individuals. In the current study, we used data from 163 pre-service teachers to explore heterogeneity in beliefs about intelligence and giftedness. Analyses from survey data suggest both concordance (dual-incremental, dual-neutral, and dual-entity) and discordance (entity-giftedness, incremental-intelligence) in beliefs. Responses to a pictorial prompt also revealed belief heterogeneity regarding the participants' conceptual beliefs about how academic giftedness and intelligence relate. Findings suggest that pre-service teachers endorse fairly construct-specific implicit beliefs about giftedness and intelligence, consistent with prior research among academically talented adolescents. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

Both qualitative and quantitative longitudinal studies of school-wide enrichment model (SEM) gifted programs demonstrate positive outcomes in cognitive, affective, and social development of participating students. The participants increased their college and work aspirations, and maintained interests and creative productive work that begin in gifted programs after they finished college and graduate school. It is our hope that more schools and districts will continue to implement talent development programs based on the SEM in the years to come, whether as part of gifted or enrichment programs, magnet or theme schools, or as a part of a general education program. During the last decade, several Renzulli Academies, schools based on the SEM using the SEM-based strategies and methods described in this chapter, have been developed, focusing on the pedagogy described in this chapter for high-potential students. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

Imagine a scenario where you wake up as principal of an elementary school. You are standing in front of parents explaining the implementation of a new gifted program. In this dream, you are describing to the audience how you will be serving high IQ children with a daily program designed to enhance and support the participating children’s gifts. The next night you are once again in the limelight at a parent meeting rationalizing a new program for mathematically talented students, selected by virtue of demonstrated interest, achievement, and creativity in mathematics. What arguments would you use in each case? Which program would be easier for you to explain to the parents and to other audiences in your professional world? We hope in this chapter to acknowledge drawbacks while leaving readers as supporters of the domain-specific talent development approach to gifted education. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)